Intel Core Ultra 5 245 vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 across all 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 does not win a single recorded test. The most decisive gap appears in PassMark integer math, where the Ultra 9 285 scores 164,869 against 91,187 for the Ultra 5 245, a delta of 44.7%. Floating point math shows a similar pattern: 194,988 versus 120,548, a 38.2% advantage. These two workloads represent the largest performance separations in the entire dataset.

Cinebench results show a consistent 32.7% delta across every version of the multi-core and single-core tests. The R23 multi-core score for the Ultra 9 285 is 48,945, compared to 32,924 for the Ultra 5 245. The R23 single-core score is 6,909 versus 4,648. The R20 and R15 iterations follow the same 32.7% gap, indicating that the relative performance difference is stable regardless of the rendering workload version. The Ultra 9 285 reaches 20,556 in R20 multi-core and 2,901 in R20 single-core, while the Ultra 5 245 records 13,828 and 1,952 respectively.

The narrowest margin appears in PassMark single-thread tests, where the Ultra 9 285 leads by 10%. The score is 4,881 versus 4,394. This is the only head-to-head result below a 20% delta. Data compression shows a 33.4% gap, with the Ultra 9 285 scoring 602,121 against 400,942. Data encryption shows a 35.6% gap, with scores of 46,949 and 30,236. Extended instructions favor the Ultra 9 285 by 26.6%, with 45,357 versus 33,304.

The remaining PassMark workloads all favor the Ultra 9 285 by margins between 20.5% and 33.3%. Prime number search scores 459 versus 365, a 20.5% delta. Physics simulation scores 3,598 versus 2,569, a 28.6% delta. Random string sorting scores 73,651 versus 49,140, a 33.3% delta. The multi-threaded PassMark score is 56,602 versus 38,706, a 31.6% delta.

The average benchmark score for the Ultra 9 285 is 75,488, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Ultra 5 245 has an average score of 48,995, placing it in the 90th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 9 285 include the AMD EPYC 8224P at 75,582 (0.1% higher), the AMD EPYC 4545P at 75,373 (0.2% lower), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75,716 (0.3% higher). The Ultra 5 245 sits near the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G at 49,196 (0.4% higher), the AMD Ryzen 9 7900 at 49,228 (0.5% higher), and the Intel Core i5-14600K at 48,618 (0.8% lower).

The Verdict

The recorded data shows a decisive performance hierarchy between these two Arrow Lake desktop processors. The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 outperforms the Intel Core Ultra 5 245 in every single benchmark test in the database. For workloads that scale with core count, the advantage is substantial. The Ultra 9 285 carries 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra 5 245 carries 14 cores and 14 threads. The multi-core Cinebench results reflect this difference directly, with a consistent 32.7% gap across R15, R20, and R23.

Single-thread performance also favors the Ultra 9 285, though the margin is smaller. The Cinebench single-core tests show the same 32.7% delta as the multi-core tests, but the PassMark single-thread test shows only a 10% gap. This suggests that the Ultra 9 285 has a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 5.10 GHz for the Ultra 5 245, which contributes to its single-thread advantage. The base clock is lower on the Ultra 9 285 at 2.50 GHz, but the recorded boost behavior and benchmark scores indicate that it reaches higher sustained frequencies under load.

The Ultra 5 245 occupies a lower tier in the same architecture. It uses the same 3 nm TSMC process node, the same Arrow Lake-S design, and the same Intel Socket 1851. It shares the same 17,800 million transistor count and 243 mm² die size. The difference in performance comes from core count, cache capacity, and clock speeds. The Ultra 9 285 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 5 245 has 24 MB. Both processors use Dual-channel DDR5 memory with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth and support ECC memory. Both include Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units and provide Gen 5 PCIe with 20 CPU lanes.

The database places the Ultra 9 285 at the 95th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 245 sits at the 90th percentile. In absolute terms, the average benchmark score difference is 26,493 points, which is a 54% improvement for the Ultra 9 285 over the Ultra 5 245. The launch MSRP for the Ultra 9 285 is $579. The launch MSRP for the Ultra 5 245 is $270.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the Core Ultra Series 2 and use the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-S die. They are manufactured by Intel on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The transistor count is identical at 17,800 million, and the die size is identical at 243 mm². Both use the Intel Socket 1851 and are designed for the desktop market segment.

The core configuration differs significantly. The Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading, so thread count equals core count in both cases. The base clock for the Ultra 5 245 is 3.50 GHz, while the Ultra 9 285 has a base clock of 2.50 GHz. The boost clock is higher on the Ultra 9 285 at 5.60 GHz, compared to 5.10 GHz on the Ultra 5 245.

Cache hierarchy differs in the L3 segment. The Ultra 9 285 has 36 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Ultra 5 245 has 24 MB. The L1 cache is 192 KB per core on both processors, and the L2 cache is 3 MB per core on both processors. Neither processor includes 3D V-Cache.

Memory support is identical. Both use DDR5 with a dual-channel memory bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. Both provide Gen 5 PCIe with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are identical as well: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units.

The production status for both parts is Active. The Ultra 9 285 has part number SRQD4, and the Ultra 5 245 has part number SRVFE. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The release date for the Ultra 9 285 is 2024-12-31, and the release date for the Ultra 5 245 is 2025-01-06.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245 has 14 cores and 14 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading.

Q: How does single-thread performance compare?

A: The Ultra 9 285 leads in all recorded single-thread tests. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 6,909 versus 4,648, a 32.7% gap. PassMark single-thread shows 4,881 versus 4,394, a 10% gap. The boost clock difference is 5.60 GHz versus 5.10 GHz.

Q: What is the largest performance difference between the two?

A: The largest gap is in PassMark integer math, where the Ultra 9 285 scores 164,869 and the Ultra 5 245 scores 91,187, a 44.7% difference. PassMark floating point math shows a 38.2% gap.

Q: Do both processors use the same architecture and process node?

A: Yes. Both use the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, and both are manufactured on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The transistor count is 17,800 million and the die size is 243 mm² for both.

Q: What memory and PCIe features do they share?

A: Both support DDR5 memory with a dual-channel bus and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. Both provide Gen 5 PCIe with 20 CPU lanes. Both include Arc Xe-LPG integrated graphics with 64 execution units.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75,488, placing it in the 95th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 5 245 has an average score of 48,995, placing it in the 90th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 wins every recorded benchmark. The data shows no test where the Ultra 5 245 takes the lead. The closest contest is PassMark single-thread, where the Ultra 9 285 leads by 10%. The widest contest is PassMark integer math, where the Ultra 9 285 leads by 44.7%. The Cinebench suite shows a uniform 32.7% advantage for the Ultra 9 285 across all versions and both single-core and multi-core variants.

The Ultra 9 285 is the stronger choice for multi-threaded rendering workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 48,945 exceeds the Ultra 5 245 score of 32,924 by 16,021 points. The same pattern holds for data compression, where the Ultra 9 285 scores 602,121 against 400,942. Data encryption shows a 35.6% gap, and random string sorting shows a 33.3% gap. These results indicate that the additional 10 cores and 12 MB of L3 cache provide a measurable advantage in parallel workloads.

The Ultra 9 285 also leads in single-thread performance, but the margin varies by test. The Cinebench single-core tests show a 32.7% advantage, while the PassMark single-thread test shows a 10% advantage. The higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz likely explains the consistent lead. The Ultra 5 245 has a lower boost clock of 5.10 GHz, which places it behind in every single-thread measurement.

The Ultra 5 245 still occupies a competitive position relative to other CPUs in the database. Its average benchmark score of 48,995 places it near the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5755G and the AMD Ryzen 9 7900, with deltas of 0.4% and 0.5% respectively. It sits 0.8% ahead of the Intel Core i5-14600K. The Ultra 9 285, by contrast, trades nearly evenly with the AMD EPYC 8224P, the AMD EPYC 4545P, and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D, with deltas of 0.1%, 0.2%, and 0.3% respectively.

For users who prioritize multi-core throughput, the Ultra 9 285 delivers a substantial lead in every rendering, encryption, and math workload recorded. For users who prioritize single-thread responsiveness, the Ultra 9 285 still holds the advantage, though the PassMark data suggests a smaller gap than the Cinebench suite indicates. The Ultra 5 245 remains a capable desktop processor within the same Arrow Lake generation, but the recorded measurements show no workload category where it overtakes the Ultra 9 285.