Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 5 315 records zero wins. The largest single margin appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 5 245 scores 365 against 112 for the Core 5 315, a delta of -69.3% from the Core 5's perspective. That means the Ultra 5 delivers more than three times the throughput in that specific workload.

Multi-core Cinebench results reinforce the pattern. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 245 posts 32924 versus 12981 for the Core 5 315, a -60.6% delta. The R20 multi-core test shows 13828 against 5452, again -60.6%. R15 multi-core gives 3318 versus 1308, also -60.6%. The consistency of the delta across all three Cinebench multi-core versions indicates the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific.

Single-core Cinebench tells a similar story. In R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 245 reaches 4648, while the Core 5 315 manages 1832, a -60.6% delta. R20 single-core shows 1952 versus 769, and R15 single-core shows 468 versus 184, both at -60.6%. These results indicate the Ultra 5's advantage is not limited to multi-threaded scaling; it extends to per-thread performance as well.

The narrowest margin in the entire dataset appears in PassMark single-thread tests. The Ultra 5 245 scores 4394, while the Core 5 315 scores 4021, a delta of only -8.5%. That is the only benchmark where the Core 5 comes within single-digit percentage territory, and it still loses. Every other test shows a gap of at least -54.7%.

PassMark integer math shows the Ultra 5 245 at 91187 versus 31690, a -65.2% delta. Floating point math gives 120548 against 42441, a -64.8% delta. Data compression shows 400942 versus 146143, a -63.6% delta. Data encryption gives 30236 against 11119, a -63.2% delta. Extended instructions show 33304 versus 13143, a -60.5% delta. Random string sorting gives 49140 versus 17551, a -64.3% delta. Multi-thread PassMark shows 38706 versus 15272, a -60.5% delta. Physics gives 2569 versus 1163, a -54.7% delta.

The average benchmark score for the Ultra 5 245 is 48995, placing it at the 90th percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core 5 315 averages 18188, sitting at the 72nd percentile. That percentile gap of 18 points reflects the magnitude of the performance separation. The Ultra 5's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 with an average score of 49228 and a -0.5% delta, along with the Intel Core i5-14600K at 48618 and a 0.8% delta. The Core 5 315 sits near the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 (0% delta) and the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0% delta), indicating it performs in a completely different tier.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 3 nm process node, but the similarity ends there. The Core Ultra 5 245 uses the Arrow Lake architecture, codenamed Arrow Lake-S, and is fabricated by TSMC. The Core 5 315 uses Wildcat Lake, with Intel listed as the foundry. The Ultra 5 245 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation, while the Core 5 315 belongs to the Core 5 (Wildcat Lake) generation.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread counts equal core counts. The Ultra 5 245's base clock is 3.50 GHz and boost clock is 5.10 GHz. The Core 5 315's base clock is 1.50 GHz and boost clock is 4.40 GHz. The Ultra 5 runs at more than double the base frequency and nearly 16% higher boost.

Cache hierarchies differ in both capacity and organization. The Ultra 5 245 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 total, 2.5 MB of L2 total, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5's L3 cache is four times larger, and its per-core L2 allocation is substantially greater.

Memory architecture separates the two as well. The Ultra 5 245 supports DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but uses a single-channel bus, yielding 59.7 GB/s. The Ultra 5 also supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 does not. PCIe connectivity differs: the Ultra 5 offers Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes, while the Core 5 offers Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics are different. The Ultra 5 245 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units. The Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The transistor count and die size are recorded only for the Ultra 5 245: 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. No such data appears for the Core 5 315.

The socket and market segment also differ. The Ultra 5 245 uses Intel Socket 1851 and is a desktop part. The Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516 and is a mobile part. The TDP values reflect that split: 65 watts for the Ultra 5 245, 15 watts for the Core 5 315. The Core 5 315 launched on April 15, 2026, while the Ultra 5 245 launched on January 6, 2025. The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340, while the Ultra 5 245 has a launch MSRP of $270. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 outperforms the Intel Core 5 315 in every recorded benchmark. The 14-core Arrow Lake desktop processor delivers more than triple the multi-threaded Cinebench scores, more than double the single-core Cinebench scores, and a 60% or greater advantage in most PassMark workloads. Its 90th percentile ranking versus the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 315 confirms the separation.

The Core 5 315's only competitive moment comes in PassMark single-thread, where it trails by 8.5%. That single result does not offset the -60.6% deltas across all Cinebench tests. For any workload that benefits from multiple cores, the Ultra 5 245 is the stronger choice. For workloads that depend on memory bandwidth, the Ultra 5's dual-channel 102.4 GB/s configuration versus single-channel 59.7 GB/s gives it a substantial edge.

The Ultra 5 245 also offers more cache, higher clock speeds, ECC support, and Gen 5 PCIe connectivity. The Core 5 315 counters with lower power consumption, a mobile form factor, and LPDDR5X memory support. Those characteristics make it suited to different hardware categories, but in raw performance terms, the Ultra 5 245 wins without exception.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. Neither supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: The largest gap appears in PassMark's find prime numbers test, where the Ultra 5 245 scores 365 versus 112 for the Core 5 315, a delta of -69.3% from the Core 5's perspective.

Q: How close are the single-thread scores?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Ultra 5 245 scores 4394 and the Core 5 315 scores 4021, a delta of -8.5%. This is the smallest margin in the entire benchmark set.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Ultra 5 245 supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 315 does not.

Q: What are the memory bandwidth figures?

A: The Ultra 5 245 has dual-channel memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 5 315 has single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Ultra 5 245 boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Core 5 315 boosts to 4.40 GHz.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 wins every benchmark category in the database. Its strongest margins appear in integer math (-65.2%), floating point math (-64.8%), and random string sorting (-64.3%). It also dominates in data compression (-63.6%), data encryption (-63.2%), and extended instructions (-60.5%). Multi-threaded PassMark shows a -60.5% delta, and physics shows a -54.7% delta. All Cinebench tests, both multi-core and single-core, show a -60.6% delta.

The Intel Core 5 315 has no benchmark wins. Its closest result is PassMark single-thread at -8.5%, which means it is competitive in lightly threaded tasks but still loses. The Core 5 315 does have advantages in the specification table: a lower TDP of 15 watts versus 65 watts, LPDDR5X memory support, and a smaller physical footprint via the BGA 1516 socket. Those features make it viable for low-power mobile designs, but the benchmark data does not show any performance category where it takes the lead.

For users prioritizing raw compute, the Ultra 5 245 is the only choice from these two. For users prioritizing power efficiency and mobile integration, the Core 5 315 offers those traits, but every measured performance metric favors the Ultra 5 245.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 315 | Intel Core Ultra 5 245 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 14 |

| Threads | 6 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 1.50 GHz | 3.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.10 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Wildcat Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Architecture | Not recorded | Arrow Lake |

| Process Node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 Cache | 192 KB | 192 KB per core |

| L2 Cache | 2.5 MB | 3 MB per core |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB shared | 24 MB shared |

| Memory Support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR5 |

| Memory Bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Release Date | April 15, 2026 | January 6, 2025 |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | $270 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |