Intel Core i7-13700 vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245T Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has the higher average benchmark score at 38194, compared to the Intel Core i7-13700's 37135. The Ultra 5 245T also sits at the 86th percentile among all CPUs, while the i7-13700 sits at the 85th.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700 wins the majority of multi-thread tests. It leads in Cinebench R15 multicore by 39.8%, in Cinebench R20 multicore by 16.3%, in PassMark multithread by 18%, and in PassMark integer math by 56.7%. However, the Core Ultra 5 245T wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 3.2%.

Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T dominates in single-core tests. It wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 23.4%, Cinebench R23 singlecore by 45.7%, and PassMark single-thread by 6.1%. The only single-core test the i7-13700 wins is Cinebench R20 singlecore, by 16.4%.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700 has 16 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i7-13700 and the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T support ECC memory.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core i7-13700 is built on a 10 nm process at Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC.

The Verdict

The data presents two distinct profiles. The Intel Core i7-13700 is the multi-threaded workhorse, winning 9 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. Its victories are often decisive, with margins like 56.4% in data compression and 56.7% in integer math. This processor is the clear choice for workloads that scale across many threads, especially integer-heavy tasks and compression.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T, despite having fewer cores and threads, wins 8 of the 17 comparisons, and its wins are concentrated in single-thread and floating-point workloads. It takes Cinebench R23 singlecore by a massive 45.7% margin and wins both PassMark floating-point math and physics by 9.9%. The Ultra 5 also holds a higher average benchmark score overall at 38194 versus 37135.

The choice depends on the workload. For users running heavily threaded applications, the i7-13700's 24 threads and strong multi-core scores make it the better pick. For users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness, modern floating-point math, or the higher overall average score, the Core Ultra 5 245T is the stronger option. The i7-13700 launched at an MSRP of $384, while the Core Ultra 5 245T launched at an MSRP of $270.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking split in the data is between single-thread and multi-thread performance. The Core Ultra 5 245T wins Cinebench R23 singlecore with a score of 3699 against the i7-13700's 2008.5, a 45.7% advantage. This is the largest margin in any test. The Ultra 5 also wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 23.4% (372 versus 285) and PassMark single-thread by 6.1% (4367 versus 4101).

The i7-13700 answers in multi-thread tests. It wins Cinebench R15 multicore by 39.8% (3692 versus 2641) and Cinebench R20 multicore by 16.3% (12806 versus 11007). Its largest wins are in PassMark integer math, where it scores 138974 against 88676, a 56.7% margin, and PassMark data compression, where it scores 443900 against 283812, a 56.4% margin.

There are two notable reversals in the pattern. The i7-13700 wins Cinebench R20 singlecore by 16.4% (1807 versus 1553), bucking the Ultra 5's single-core dominance. Conversely, the Core Ultra 5 245T wins Cinebench R23 multicore by 3.2% (26208 versus 25369), interrupting the i7-13700's multi-thread winning streak. This suggests the newer architecture has real strengths in certain modern workloads, even when the older chip has more threads.

The remaining tests split cleanly. The i7-13700 wins PassMark data encryption by 8.4% (25653 versus 23656), extended instructions by 20.4% (26578 versus 22071), multithread by 18% (36387 versus 30833), and random string sorting by 32.9% (46418 versus 34931). The Ultra 5 wins PassMark find prime numbers by 54.6% (324 versus 147), floating-point math by 9.9% (108499 versus 97723), and physics by 9.9% (2278 versus 2053).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several core specifications. The Intel Core i7-13700 has 16 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads. The i7-13700 has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Ultra 5 245T has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Both have a TDP of 65, so power draw is identical on paper. The sockets differ: the i7-13700 uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 245T uses Intel Socket 1851. The i7-13700 supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Ultra 5 245T supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 5 245T has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, a figure not listed for the i7-13700.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The i7-13700 supports Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 5 245T supports Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ as well: the i7-13700 has UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 245T has Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Both support ECC memory, both have locked multipliers, and both are active production parts.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide is significant. The Intel Core i7-13700 is built on Raptor Lake, specifically Raptor Lake-S, using a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T is built on Arrow Lake, specifically Arrow Lake-S, using a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Ultra 5 also lists 17,800 million transistors, while the i7-13700's transistor count is not recorded.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The i7-13700 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 5 245T 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 cache is larger on the Ultra 5, but the total shared L3 is larger on the i7-13700.

Die sizes are close: 257 mm² for the i7-13700 and 243 mm² for the Ultra 5 245T. The release dates are two years apart, with the i7-13700 released on 2023-01-03 and the Ultra 5 245T released on 2025-01-06. The generational labels reflect this: the i7-13700 is Core 13th Gen, while the Ultra 5 245T is Core Ultra Series 2. The part numbers also differ: SRMBA for the i7-13700 and SRVFF for the Ultra 5 245T.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i7-13700 wins in heavily threaded, integer-heavy, and compression workloads. Its 56.7% lead in integer math and 56.4% lead in data compression are the standout margins. It also wins data encryption by 8.4%, extended instructions by 20.4%, random string sorting by 32.9%, and the overall PassMark multithread test by 18%. In Cinebench, it takes R15 multicore by 39.8% and R20 multicore by 16.3%. This processor is the choice for users running parallel compute tasks, database-style integer operations, and compression algorithms.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins in single-thread performance, floating-point math, and prime-number finding. Its 45.7% win in Cinebench R23 singlecore is the single largest margin in the entire comparison. It also wins Cinebench R15 singlecore by 23.4%, PassMark single-thread by 6.1%, floating-point math by 9.9%, and physics by 9.9%. Its 54.6% win in find prime numbers (324 versus 147) is the second-largest margin across all tests. The Ultra 5 also edges out the i7-13700 in Cinebench R23 multicore by 3.2%, showing it can hold its own in at least one modern multi-thread test.

The i7-13700 wins 9 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Ultra 5 wins 8. The average benchmark scores favor the Ultra 5 at 38194 versus 37135, a narrow gap of about 2.8%. The i7-13700's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 160 with a delta of 0%, while the Ultra 5's nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 250 with a delta of -0.1%. Both processors sit in the 85th to 86th percentile range, indicating they are close in overall standing despite their very different architectural approaches.