Intel Core 5 320 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Intel Core 5 320 is a mobile processor built on the Wildcat Lake architecture, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop part from the Arrow Lake family. The benchmark data shows a complete separation in performance class, with the desktop chip winning all 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Core 5 320 is a 6-core, 6-thread processor with a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF offers 14 cores and 14 threads with a 4.20 GHz base and 5.20 GHz boost. This review examines where each processor wins, the architectural differences, the specific benchmark deltas, and which user should select which part based strictly on the recorded data.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins every single benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. There are no test categories where the Intel Core 5 320 takes a lead. The closest margin for the Core 5 320 appears in the PassMark single-thread test, where it trails by 14.2%, while the largest deficit is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it falls behind by 83.1%. This is a clear case of a desktop processor dominating a mobile part across all measured workloads.

The Core 5 320 is positioned for mobile use, as indicated by its market segment classification and its 15 W TDP. Its performance profile is suited for everyday tasks and light productivity, with an average benchmark score of 18023 and a percentile rank of 72 among all CPUs. The Core Ultra 5 245KF, with a 125 W TDP and an average score of 55093, sits at the 91st percentile. The desktop chip is the clear winner for any compute-heavy workload, including rendering, data encryption, and floating-point mathematics. The mobile part has no benchmark category where it pulls ahead, so the use-case split is defined entirely by the platform and power envelope rather than by performance advantages.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families. The Core 5 320 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake-S codename and is also built on a 3 nm node, but the foundry is TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245KF contains 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die, while the transistor count and die size for the Core 5 320 are not recorded.

Core configuration differs sharply. The Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge. The Core 5 320 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245KF lists 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 5 320 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory through a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s of bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245KF supports DDR5 over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The mobile chip uses an Intel BGA 1516 socket, while the desktop chip uses Intel Socket 1851. PCIe connectivity also separates the two: the Core 5 320 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU-only lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 320 with Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier, which the Core 5 320 lacks. The release dates differ by over a year, with the Core Ultra 5 245KF released on 2024-10-23 and the Core 5 320 released on 2026-04-15.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows the largest performance gaps. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 36647 against 6197 for the Core 5 320, a delta of 83.1%. The R23 single-core test shows a 62.8% advantage for the desktop chip, with scores of 5173 versus 1926. Cinebench R20 multi-core produces a 64.5% delta, 15391 versus 5462, and the R20 single-core test shows the same 64.5% margin, 2172 versus 771. Cinebench R15 multi-core shows a 71.5% gap, 3693 versus 1054, while the R15 single-core test shows a 47% difference, 521 versus 276.

PassMark tests follow a similar pattern. The data compression test shows the Core Ultra 5 245KF scoring 460123 against 148779, a 67.7% advantage. Data encryption shows a 67.1% gap, 33381 versus 10984. Extended instructions tests show a 65% difference, 37912 versus 13262. Floating-point math shows a 67.7% gap, 131546 versus 42440. Integer math shows a 67.3% gap, 98854 versus 32323. The physics test shows a 59.3% advantage, 2998 versus 1221. Random string sorting shows a 67.3% gap, 55206 versus 18038.

The closest benchmark in the entire comparison is PassMark single-thread, where the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 4715 versus 4045 for the Core 5 320, a 14.2% margin. This indicates that the mobile chip's single-core efficiency is relatively strong, though still behind the desktop part. The PassMark multithread test shows a 64.2% gap, 43110 versus 15450. The find prime numbers test shows a 73.6% gap, 416 versus 110.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the superior processor in every measured benchmark. Its average benchmark score of 55093 places it 205% above the Core 5 320's average of 18023, and its 91st percentile rank versus the 72nd percentile confirms the performance hierarchy. The Core Ultra 5 245KF also sits among stronger competitors, with its nearest rivals including the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (0.6% ahead), the Intel Core 7 253PQE (1.5% ahead), and the Intel Core i9-14900HX (1.6% ahead). The Core 5 320's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 1600 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core 5 120U (0.7% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (0.7% ahead), indicating it competes in a much lower performance band.

Users who need maximum multi-threaded performance, such as rendering workloads in Cinebench or heavy data compression tasks, should select the Core Ultra 5 245KF. Its 14 cores, higher clock speeds, dual-channel memory, and Gen 5 PCIe support all contribute to its dominant position. Users who require a mobile platform with integrated graphics and lower power consumption should select the Core 5 320, as it is the only one of the two designed for the BGA 1516 mobile socket. The desktop chip has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU, while the mobile chip includes Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has an average benchmark score of 55093, while the Intel Core 5 320 has an average of 18023.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 has 6 cores and 6 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads.

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

A: The largest gap is in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF leads by 83.1%, scoring 36647 versus 6197.

Q: Which processor supports integrated graphics?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics.

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 5 320 supports 59.7 GB/s over a single-channel bus, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF supports 102.4 GB/s over a dual-channel bus.

Q: What is the closest benchmark result between the two?

A: The closest result is in PassMark single-thread, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF leads by 14.2%, scoring 4715 versus 4045.