Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive sweep: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons, with the Intel Core 5 315 trailing in every single test. The margins are substantial across both synthetic and application-level workloads, indicating a fundamental performance gap rather than a narrow advantage in specific scenarios.

In Cinebench tests, the Ultra 5 245KF delivers consistently dominant results. The multi-core scores show a delta of -64.6% for the Core 5 315 across all three versions: Cinebench R15 (1308 vs 3693), R20 (5452 vs 15391), and R23 (12981 vs 36647). This consistent percentage gap across different Cinebench versions suggests the performance difference scales uniformly with thread count and workload intensity. Single-core Cinebench results tell a similar story, with deltas of -64.7% in R15 (184 vs 521) and -64.6% in both R20 (769 vs 2172) and R23 (1832 vs 5173). The near-identical percentage deltas between single-core and multi-core tests indicate the architectural advantage of the Ultra 5 245KF is not dependent on parallelism but reflects a per-core instruction throughput advantage.

PassMark results reinforce the same pattern. The largest delta appears in the find prime numbers test, where the Core 5 315 scores 112 against the Ultra 5 245KF's 416, a -73.1% gap. This test is particularly sensitive to raw integer execution and clock speed, and the 4.20 GHz base clock of the Ultra 5 245KF against the 1.50 GHz base clock of the Core 5 315 explains the extreme divergence. Data compression shows a -68.2% delta (146143 vs 460123), while random string sorting also shows -68.2% (17551 vs 55206), suggesting memory bandwidth and cache hierarchy play a significant role in these workloads. The Ultra 5 245KF's 24 MB shared L3 cache and dual-channel memory interface provide a substantial advantage over the Core 5 315's 6 MB shared L3 and single-channel memory bus.

Floating point math shows a -67.7% delta (42441 vs 131546), and integer math shows -67.9% (31690 vs 98854). Data encryption shows -66.7% (11119 vs 33381), while extended instructions show -65.3% (13143 vs 37912). The physics test shows the smallest multi-core delta at -61.2% (1163 vs 2998), possibly reflecting the test's specific sensitivity to certain execution units. The PassMark multithread score shows -64.6% (15272 vs 43110), matching the Cinebench multi-core deltas precisely.

The closest contest is in single-threaded PassMark performance. The Core 5 315 scores 4021, while the Ultra 5 245KF scores 4715, a delta of only -14.7%. This is the sole test where the Core 5 315 comes within striking distance, though it still loses. The relatively small single-thread gap, combined with the massive multi-thread gap, indicates that the Ultra 5 245KF's advantage comes primarily from having more than twice the cores (14 vs 6) and significantly higher boost clocks (5.20 GHz vs 4.40 GHz).

The average benchmark score tells the overall story: the Core 5 315 sits at 18188, placing it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 245KF achieves 55093, placing it in the 91st percentile. The nearest rivals confirm the positioning. The Core 5 315 matches the AMD EPYC 9274F (18189) and Intel Core i7-9700 (18180) almost exactly, with 0% delta, and sits marginally ahead of the Intel Core i7-1365U (18177) and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U (18176) by 0.1%. The Ultra 5 245KF sits between the Intel Core 7 253PQE (55919, -1.5% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (54762, +0.6% delta), with the Intel Core i9-14900HX (56004) just above and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053) just below.

FAQ

Q: Why does the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF win every benchmark by such a wide margin?

A: The data shows a combination of factors. The Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores versus 6, a 5.20 GHz boost clock versus 4.40 GHz, 24 MB of shared L3 cache versus 6 MB, and a dual-channel memory bus versus single-channel. These structural differences compound across all workload types.

Q: Is there any test where the Intel Core 5 315 is competitive?

A: The only test with a relatively small gap is PassMark single-thread performance, where the Core 5 315 scores 4021 against 4715, a -14.7% delta. In every other test, the delta exceeds -61%, making the single-thread test the closest comparison.

Q: How does the average benchmark score translate to overall CPU ranking?

A: The Core 5 315 has an average benchmark score of 18188 and sits in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 5 245KF has an average score of 55093 and sits in the 91st percentile, a difference of 19 percentile points.

Q: What does the -64.6% delta in Cinebench R23 multi-core mean in practical terms?

A: It means the Ultra 5 245KF's score of 36647 is more than 2.8 times the Core 5 315's score of 12981. The consistent -64.6% delta across all Cinebench versions indicates a fixed performance ratio that does not change with workload scaling.

Q: Which CPUs are the nearest performance rivals for each processor?

A: The Core 5 315 matches the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700 with a 0% delta, and is 0.1% ahead of the Intel Core i7-1365U and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U. The Ultra 5 245KF is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, 1.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, and 1.5% behind the Intel Core 7 253PQE.

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the Core 5 315 performs better relative to the Ultra 5 245KF than others?

A: Yes, the physics test shows the smallest delta at -61.2%, while the find prime numbers test shows the largest at -73.1%. The single-thread PassMark test shows the smallest overall delta at -14.7%, indicating the Core 5 315's single-core architecture is comparatively stronger than its multi-core configuration.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their target platforms and internal designs. The Intel Core 5 315 is a mobile part using the Wildcat Lake codename, built on a 3 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It is designed for the Intel BGA 1516 socket and belongs to the Core 5 generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop part using the Arrow Lake-S codename, also built on a 3 nm process but manufactured at TSMC. It uses the Intel Socket 1851 and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation.

The core configuration differs sharply. The Core 5 315 offers 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading, while the Ultra 5 245KF offers 14 cores and 14 threads, also without hyperthreading. The base clock of the Core 5 315 is 1.50 GHz, which is typical for a low-power mobile design, while the Ultra 5 245KF runs at 4.20 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.40 GHz and 5.20 GHz respectively, giving the desktop part a 0.80 GHz advantage.

Cache hierarchies are completely different in scale. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 245KF has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L2 allocation in the Ultra 5 245KF is particularly significant, as it allows each core to maintain a larger working set locally.

Memory architecture also diverges. The Core 5 315 supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory over a single-channel interface, yielding 59.7 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 over a dual-channel interface, delivering 102.4 GB/s. The 71.5% bandwidth advantage of the Ultra 5 245KF directly impacts memory-intensive workloads like data compression and random string sorting, which show large deltas in the benchmark data.

The transistor count and die size are only recorded for the Ultra 5 245KF, which has 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 5 315 does not have recorded transistor or die size data. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 245KF provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics differ as well, with the Core 5 315 featuring Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics (N/A). The multiplier is locked on the Core 5 315 and unlocked on the Ultra 5 245KF, with the part number SAEFC for the former and SRQCY for the latter.

The Verdict

The benchmark data indicates a clear separation: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the dominant performer in every measured category. With an average benchmark score of 55093 against 18188, it outperforms the Core 5 315 by a factor of approximately three. The 91st percentile ranking versus the 72nd percentile places these processors in different performance tiers entirely.

The Core 5 315 is a mobile processor with a 15 W TDP, designed for efficiency in portable systems. Its performance profile, with the 1.50 GHz base clock and 6 MB of L3 cache, aligns with low-power operation. Its single-thread PassMark score of 4021 shows it can handle everyday tasks, and its nearest rivals, the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700, both with 0% delta, indicate it delivers performance comparable to those established parts.

The Ultra 5 245KF, with a 125 W TDP, is a desktop processor built for maximum throughput. Its 14 cores, 24 MB of L3 cache, dual-channel memory, and 5.20 GHz boost clock deliver scores that place it among the top 9% of all CPUs. The nearest rivals, including the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and Intel Core i9-14900HX, confirm its high-end positioning. The unlocked multiplier and Gen 5 PCIe support further differentiate it as an enthusiast-oriented part.

The choice between these two processors depends entirely on the target system. The Core 5 315 suits mobile platforms where power efficiency and compact packaging matter, and its integrated Xe3 Graphics provide display output without a discrete GPU. The Ultra 5 245KF suits desktop builds where multi-core performance and memory bandwidth take priority, and it requires a discrete GPU since it lacks integrated graphics. The 14.7% single-thread gap means even lightly threaded applications favor the Ultra 5 245KF, while multi-threaded workloads show a 64.6% or larger gap. There is no benchmark category in which the Core 5 315 wins.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification. The core count is 6 for the Core 5 315 versus 14 for the Ultra 5 245KF, both with equal thread counts matching core counts. The base clock is 1.50 GHz versus 4.20 GHz, and the boost clock is 4.40 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. The TDP is 15 W versus 125 W, reflecting the mobile versus desktop design targets.

The socket is Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 315 and Intel Socket 1851 for the Ultra 5 245KF. The codename is Wildcat Lake versus Arrow Lake-S, with the architecture listed as null for the Core 5 315 and Arrow Lake for the Ultra 5 245KF. The process node is 3 nm for both, but the foundry differs: Intel for the Core 5 315 and TSMC for the Ultra 5 245KF. Transistor count and die size are only recorded for the Ultra 5 245KF at 17,800 million and 243 mm².

Cache specifications show the Core 5 315 with 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3, while the Ultra 5 245KF has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: the Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is false for both. PCIe is Gen 4 with 6 lanes for the Core 5 315 versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the Ultra 5 245KF. Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 315 (Intel Xe3 Graphics, 2 Xe) and absent on the Ultra 5 245KF. The market segment is Mobile for the Core 5 315 and Desktop for the Ultra 5 245KF. The multiplier is locked on the former and unlocked on the latter. The launch MSRP is $340 for the Core 5 315 and $294 for the Ultra 5 245KF.