Intel Core 5 223PE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits the two processors into distinct usage profiles. The Intel Core 5 223PE wins 12 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T takes 5. This is not a case of one part dominating every category; rather, the workloads themselves determine the victor.

The Core 5 223PE is the stronger choice for general integer-heavy and data-oriented tasks. It leads in PassMark integer math with a 12.6% advantage (99819 vs 88676), in data compression by 22.1% (346623 vs 283812), and in extended instructions by 11.8% (24672 vs 22071). The physics workload also favors the 223PE, where it posts a 9.4% edge (2493 vs 2278). Random string sorting goes to the 223PE by a narrow 2.5% margin (35798 vs 34931). These results suggest the 223PE handles traditional CPU logic and branch-heavy code more efficiently.

The Core Ultra 5 245T, by contrast, takes the floating-point and cryptographic workloads decisively. It wins floating-point math by 29.5% (108499 vs 76468), data encryption by 22% (23656 vs 18448), and prime number finding by a massive 50.9% (324 vs 159). The single-thread PassMark test also goes to the 245T, with a 3.4% lead (4367 vs 4219). This pattern points to an architecture with wider vector execution resources and stronger per-thread throughput in math-heavy scenarios.

The Cinebench suite, which balances multi-core and single-core rendering, is uniformly close. The 223PE edges ahead in every Cinebench test, but by less than 1.1% in each case. The largest gap is 1.1% in Cinebench R15 single-core (376 vs 372). Multi-core deltas sit at 0.9% across R15, R20, and R23. Similarly, PassMark multithread shows a 0.9% lead for the 223PE (31124 vs 30833). These margins are within run-to-run noise territory, indicating near-parity for general multithreaded throughput.

Architecture Differences

The two chips come from different Intel design families and manufacturing pipelines. The Core 5 223PE is a Bartlett Lake part built on Intel's 10 nm process, while the Core Ultra 5 245T is an Arrow Lake-S design from the Core Ultra Series 2, fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. The 245T carries 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die; the 223PE has no transistor or die size figures recorded.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The 223PE has 8 cores and 16 threads, implying hyperthreading support. The 245T has 14 cores but only 14 threads, meaning it operates without hyperthreading on some or all cores. The 245T's extra physical cores (6 more) do not translate into thread count advantage, which explains the near-parity in multithreaded benchmarks despite the core count difference.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The 223PE uses 80 KB of L1 per core and 2 MB of L2 per core, with 24 MB of shared L3. The 245T has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core, also with 24 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 on the 245T align with its per-thread performance advantage in single-thread workloads.

Memory support separates the two. The 223PE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the 245T supports only DDR5. Both run dual-channel, but the 245T has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s for the 223PE. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the 223PE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, the 245T provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are different tiers. The 223PE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the 245T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. Sockets are incompatible: the 223PE uses Intel Socket 1700, the 245T uses Intel Socket 1851. The 245T was released earlier (2025-01-06) than the 223PE (2026-03-08). Both parts have locked multipliers and are active in production.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores, compared to 8 cores for the Intel Core 5 223PE. However, the 245T has 14 threads while the 223PE has 16 threads, so the 223PE actually has more threads.

Q: Which processor is faster in single-threaded PassMark?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 4367 in PassMark single-thread, which is 3.4% higher than the Intel Core 5 223PE's 4219.

Q: Which processor wins in data compression?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PE wins data compression with a score of 346623, which is 22.1% higher than the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T's 283812.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core 5 223PE and Intel Core Ultra 5 245T support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the Intel Core 5 223PE has 89.6 GB/s.

Q: What socket does each processor use?

A: The Intel Core 5 223PE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T uses Intel Socket 1851. The sockets are not interchangeable.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 223PE | Intel Core Ultra 5 245T |

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

| Cores | 8 | 14 |

| Threads | 16 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 Cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

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

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

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

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Release Date | 2026-03-08 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $232 | $270 |

The base clock favors the 223PE at 2.90 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, and the boost clock is also slightly higher at 5.20 GHz versus 5.10 GHz. The 245T compensates with a smaller process node and larger per-core caches.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Intel Core 5 223PE comes in PassMark data compression, where it scores 346623 against 283812, a 22.1% advantage. This is the clearest separation in the entire benchmark set. The 223PE also shows strong leads in integer math (12.6%, 99819 vs 88676) and extended instructions (11.8%, 24672 vs 22071). The physics workload gives the 223PE a 9.4% edge (2493 vs 2278), and random string sorting adds a 2.5% win (35798 vs 34931). All Cinebench tests go to the 223PE by margins between 0.9% and 1.1%, including R23 multi-core (26455 vs 26208) and R23 single-core (3734 vs 3699).

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T counters with the biggest margin in the entire comparison: prime number finding, where it scores 324 versus 159, a 50.9% advantage. Floating-point math is another strong win for the 245T, at 108499 versus 76468, a 29.5% gap. Data encryption goes to the 245T by 22% (23656 vs 18448). PassMark single-thread gives the 245T a 3.4% edge (4367 vs 4219), matching the single-thread variant result. The 245T also wins PassMark multithread? No, the 223PE wins that by 0.9% (31124 vs 30833), rounding out the Cinebench-style close results.

The overall pattern is clear: the 223PE wins where integer logic and compression dominate, while the 245T wins where floating-point throughput and vector math matter. The 50.9% prime number gap is the standout outlier, indicating a fundamental difference in how each architecture handles modular arithmetic and division-heavy loops. The 29.5% floating-point lead is similarly substantial, suggesting the 245T's wider SIMD paths and newer process node deliver real throughput gains in numeric workloads.

In the aggregate, the 223PE has a higher average benchmark score of 40585 versus 38194 for the 245T, and it sits at the 87th percentile among all CPUs compared to the 245T's 86th. The nearest rivals for the 223PE include the Intel Core 7 253PE (0.1% higher average score) and the Intel Xeon 6357P (0.1% lower). For the 245T, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (0.1% lower) and the Intel Core i5-13600KF (0.2% higher). These percentile and rival data confirm that both parts occupy similar overall performance tiers despite their divergent workload-specific results.