Intel Core Ultra 5 235T vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245T Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T and Intel Core Ultra 5 245T are near-identical twins in the Arrow Lake-S desktop lineup, sharing the same core count, cache hierarchy, and 65W TDP. Benchmark data shows the 235T wins 10 of 17 head-to-head tests, while the 245T counters with 7 wins, including some of the largest margins. The overall average benchmark scores are nearly tied at 38561 for the 235T and 38194 for the 245T, placing both at the 86th percentile of all CPUs. The 245T does command a higher launch MSRP of $270 versus $247 for the 235T, but the performance delta is far smaller than that price gap suggests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most decisive victory in this comparison belongs to the 235T in the PassMark extended instructions test, where it scores 23212 against the 245T's 22071, a 5.2% advantage. This is the single largest percentage difference between the two processors in any benchmark, and it indicates the 235T has a measurable edge in workloads that leverage specialized instruction sets. Similarly, the 235T wins the PassMark data compression test by 4% (295100 vs 283812), showing a clear advantage in archiving and compression workloads.

The 245T takes its own decisive wins, however. In PassMark physics, it posts 2278 versus 2157 for the 235T, a 5.3% lead that flips the script. The 245T also dominates in PassMark integer math, scoring 88676 against 84244, a 5% margin. These results suggest the 245T has a stronger raw integer execution pipeline, even though both chips share the same core architecture and thread count.

The Cinebench suite tells a story of near-total parity. Across all six Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests (both single and multicore), the 235T wins every single one, but by margins of only 0.1% to 0.3%. For example, Cinebench R23 multicore shows 26232 for the 235T versus 26208 for the 245T, while single-core is 3703 against 3699. These are effectively statistical ties, and neither chip gains a practical advantage in rendering workloads.

Other PassMark tests split more evenly. The 245T wins floating point math by 1.8% (108499 vs 106546), find prime numbers by 1.9% (324 vs 318), and single-thread by 0.6% (4367 vs 4339). The 235T counters with wins in multithread (0.3%, 30918 vs 30833), random string sorting (1.3%, 35377 vs 34931), and data encryption (-0.8% for the 245T, meaning the 235T loses that one narrowly). The pattern is clear: the 235T excels in compression, extended instructions, and multithreaded throughput, while the 245T pulls ahead in physics, integer math, and floating point.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Arrow Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node from TSMC, and both pack 14 cores and 14 threads — there is no hyperthreading on either chip. The transistor count is identical at 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, and both share the same cache configuration: 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The socket is the same Intel Socket 1851, and both use DDR5 memory with dual-channel support and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth.

The core differences are limited to a few key specifications. The 235T has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the 245T boosts slightly higher to 5.10 GHz. Both have the same 2.20 GHz base clock. The integrated graphics differ substantially: the 235T ships with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units, while the 245T doubles that to 64 execution units. This is the most significant architectural divergence, and it will matter for users who rely on the iGPU.

ECC memory support is another differentiator. The 245T supports ECC memory, while the 235T does not. Both processors run on PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, and neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is off the table for both. The part numbers are SRQES for the 235T and SRVFF for the 245T, and both were released on the same date in January 2025.

Where Each One Wins

The 235T is the choice for data-heavy and compression-oriented tasks. Its 4% win in data compression and 5.2% win in extended instructions make it the stronger option for archiving files, running database compression routines, or any workload that leverages SSE or AVX-style instruction extensions. It also edges out the 245T in multithreaded throughput (0.3%) and random string sorting (1.3%), suggesting a slight edge in highly parallel, memory-bound scenarios. The 235T wins all six Cinebench tests, so for pure rendering benchmarks, it is technically the faster part, even if the margin is negligible.

The 245T is better suited for physics simulation and integer-heavy compute. Its 5.3% lead in PassMark physics and 5% lead in integer math are the largest wins in its column, making it the better pick for scientific computing, financial modeling, or any workload that hammer integer arithmetic. The 245T also wins floating point math by 1.8% and single-thread performance by 0.6%, giving it a slight edge in general desktop responsiveness and lightly threaded applications. Its larger 64EU integrated graphics is a major advantage for systems without a discrete GPU, as it provides substantially more graphics compute capacity.

For everyday mixed use, the differences are small enough that most users would not notice a change. The 245T's higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 5.00 GHz likely contributes to its single-thread and integer wins, but the 235T's lower price and stronger compression performance make it the data-focused pick.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the 235T boosts to 5.00 GHz. Both share the same 2.20 GHz base clock.

Q: Do these CPUs support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T supports ECC memory, but the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T does not.

Q: Which chip is better for data compression workloads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235T wins the PassMark data compression test by 4%, scoring 295100 against the 245T's 283812.

Q: What is the difference in integrated graphics?

A: The 245T features Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the 235T has the same architecture but with only 24 execution units.

Q: How do the two compare in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The 235T scores 26232 and the 245T scores 26208, giving the 235T a 0.1% edge — effectively a tie.

Q: Which CPU has a higher launch MSRP?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T has a launch MSRP of $270, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T is listed at $247.

The Verdict

The data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 235T as the better overall value for most users. It wins the majority of benchmark tests (10 vs 7), posts a higher average benchmark score of 38561 versus 38194, and does so at a lower launch MSRP of $247 compared to $270 for the 245T. Its wins in data compression and extended instructions are the largest margins in the comparison, and it matches the 245T in Cinebench rendering performance within statistical noise. For users who prioritize compression, archiving, and multithreaded throughput, the 235T is the clear pick.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T earns its higher price in specific niches. If the workload involves physics simulation, integer-heavy math, or floating point computation, the 245T's 5.3% physics lead and 5% integer math lead are meaningful. The 245T also offers ECC memory support and a much larger 64EU integrated GPU, making it the better choice for entry-level systems without a discrete graphics card or for users who require error-correcting memory. Its higher 5.10 GHz boost clock contributes to a 0.6% single-thread win, which is minor but real.

Neither chip is a dramatic winner over the other in general-purpose computing. Both sit at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, and their nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14500 and AMD Ryzen 7 250, with delta percentages under 1% in either direction. The decision comes down to workload: the 235T for data and compression, the 245T for math, physics, and iGPU-dependent systems.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in only a handful of specification fields. The boost clock is 5.00 GHz on the 235T versus 5.10 GHz on the 245T. ECC memory support is absent on the 235T but present on the 245T. Integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 24 execution units on the 235T, doubling to 64 execution units on the 245T. The launch MSRP is $247 for the 235T and $270 for the 245T, and the part numbers are SRQES for the 235T and SRVFF for the 245T. All other core specifications — 14 cores, 14 threads, 2.20 GHz base clock, 65W TDP, 3 nm process, 17,800 million transistors, 243 mm² die size, 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, 24 MB shared L3, DDR5 dual-channel memory, 102.4 GB/s bandwidth, PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes, and Intel Socket 1851 — are identical between the two.