Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Comparison

Intel Core 5 330 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF: these two processors occupy different corners of Intel's lineup. The Core 5 330 is a mobile-focused chip built for efficiency, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop part aimed at performance. The data shows a substantial gap in almost every measured category, but the Core 5 330 has a clear role for specific workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Intel Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

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

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 36647 compared to the Core 5 330's 13150, a delta of -64.1% in favor of the Ultra part.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 5 245KF supports dual-channel memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, while the Core 5 330 uses single-channel memory with 59.7 GB/s.

Q: Do both processors have integrated graphics?

A: No. The Intel Core 5 330 includes Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe), while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics (N/A).

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF boosts to 5.20 GHz, compared to 4.60 GHz for the Intel Core 5 330.

Q: What is the market segment for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 is designed for the mobile market, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is a desktop processor.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use the same 3 nm process node but are built by different foundries. The Intel Core 5 330, codenamed Wildcat Lake, is fabricated by Intel. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, part of the Arrow Lake family, is fabricated by TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has a transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 5 330 has no recorded transistor or die size data.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores and 14 threads, also without hyper-threading but with more than double the physical cores. The cache hierarchy also differs: the Core 5 330 has 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3.

Socket compatibility is entirely different. The Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, a soldered mobile socket, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF uses Intel Socket 1851 for desktop builds. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Core 5 330 is locked.

Memory support separates them further. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 245KF supports only DDR5, but over a dual-channel bus with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 5 330 has Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 245KF has Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The Core 5 330 includes integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has no integrated graphics, requiring a discrete GPU. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are lopsided. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins all 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The Core 5 330 records zero wins.

In Cinebench tests, the gap is consistent. Multi-core R15 shows 3693 for the Ultra versus 1325 for the Core 5, a -64.1% delta. Single-core R15 shows 521 versus 186, a -64.3% delta. R20 multi-core is 15391 versus 5523 (-64.1%), and R20 single-core is 2172 versus 779 (-64.1%). R23 multi-core is 36647 versus 13150 (-64.1%), with R23 single-core at 5173 versus 1856 (-64.1%).

PassMark tests show similar margins. Data compression is 460123 versus 145287, a -68.4% delta. Data encryption is 33381 versus 11076 (-66.8%). Extended instructions score 37912 versus 12808 (-66.2%). The largest delta is in find prime numbers: 416 versus 114, a -72.6% difference. Floating point math is 131546 versus 43885 (-66.6%), and integer math is 98854 versus 33258 (-66.4%).

The smallest gap is in single-thread performance. PassMark single-thread shows 4715 versus 4088, a -13.3% delta. That is still a win for the Core Ultra 5 245KF, but it confirms that the Core 5 330 is relatively competitive in lightly threaded tasks. Multi-thread PassMark is 43110 versus 15471 (-64.1%), and physics is 2998 versus 1201 (-59.9%). Random string sorting is 55206 versus 17771 (-67.8%).

The average benchmark score reinforces the hierarchy: the Core Ultra 5 245KF averages 55093, while the Core 5 330 averages 18345. In percentile terms, the Ultra sits at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 5 sits at the 72nd.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF has 14 cores versus 6 for the Core 5 330. Threads are 14 versus 6. Base clock is 4.20 GHz versus 1.50 GHz. Boost clock is 5.20 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. TDP is 125 watts versus 15 watts, a reflection of the desktop versus mobile design.

Socket type differs: Intel Socket 1851 versus Intel BGA 1516. The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake architecture, while the Core 5 330 uses Wildcat Lake. Foundry is TSMC for the Ultra and Intel for the Core 5.

Cache amounts differ in both size and organization. The Core Ultra 5 245KF has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB L1 total, 2.5 MB L2 total, and 6 MB shared L3.

Memory support is narrower on the Ultra (DDR5 only) versus the Core 5 (DDR5 and LPDDR5X). Memory bus is dual-channel versus single-channel. Memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes.

Integrated graphics are present on the Core 5 330 (Intel Xe3, 2 Xe) but absent on the Core Ultra 5 245KF. The Ultra has an unlocked multiplier; the Core 5 does not. Release dates are 2024-10-23 for the Ultra and 2026-04-15 for the Core 5. Launch MSRP is $294 for the Ultra and $309 for the Core 5.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split between mobile efficiency and desktop performance. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the stronger processor in every benchmark recorded. Its 14 cores, higher clocks, and broader memory interface give it a commanding lead in multi-threaded work, with deltas around -64% in Cinebench tests and -66% to -72% in most PassMark workloads.

The Intel Core 5 330 is not without merit. Its 15-watt TDP and integrated graphics make it suitable for thin-and-light mobile systems. The single-thread PassMark delta of -13.3% shows that for basic responsiveness, the Core 5 330 is closer to the Ultra than in any other test. However, the Core Ultra 5 245KF still wins that test outright.

The nearest rivals in the database confirm the positioning. The Core 5 330 sits between the Intel Core i3-13100 and the Intel Core 7 360, with an average score 0.1% behind the i3-14100 and 0.2% behind the Core 7 360. The Core Ultra 5 245KF sits near the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D, scoring 0.6% above it, and 1.9% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K.

For desktop builds where performance is the priority, the Core Ultra 5 245KF is the clear choice. For mobile platforms where power draw and integrated graphics matter, the Core 5 330 is the only one of the two that fits.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF wins in all 17 head-to-head comparisons. It is the pick for multi-threaded rendering, content creation, and CPU-intensive simulation. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 is nearly three times the Core 5 330's 13150. Data compression and encryption workloads also favor the Ultra heavily, with deltas of -68.4% and -66.8% respectively.

The Intel Core 5 330 wins in no benchmark category. Its advantages are contextual rather than performance-based. The 15-watt TDP versus 125 watts means it can operate in passively cooled or low-power mobile designs. The integrated Intel Xe3 Graphics eliminate the need for a discrete GPU in basic systems. The support for LPDDR5X memory allows for compact, power-efficient memory layouts. The single-channel memory bus, while slower, is appropriate for its intended segment.

For a desktop user with a discrete GPU, the Core Ultra 5 245KF is the only sensible option. For a mobile user prioritizing battery life and portability, the Core 5 330 exists as a low-power alternative. The two processors do not compete in the same arena; the data shows the Ultra is a desktop workhorse, while the Core 5 is a mobile efficiency chip.