Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The single exception is the PassMark physics test, where the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H takes a narrow win with a score of 2697 against 2526, a margin of 6.3%. That result stands alone; everywhere else, the 245HX leads by substantial margins.

The largest gap appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 245HX scores 4568 against the 338H's 2044. That is a 123.5% advantage, meaning the 245HX more than doubles the 338H's result in that workload. The multi-core version of the same test shows a 98.1% delta, with scores of 32358 and 16331 respectively. These two results alone establish the 245HX as the far stronger processor for rendering tasks.

The Cinebench R20 results follow the same pattern. In multi-core, the 245HX records 13590 versus 10213, a 33.1% lead. In single-core, the same percentage applies: 1918 against 1441. The R15 tests show a similar story, with a 30.2% multi-core advantage (3261 vs 2504) and a 50.8% single-core advantage (460 vs 305). Across all three Cinebench generations, the 245HX's lead is consistent and large, particularly in single-threaded performance.

PassMark results reinforce the picture. The 245HX leads by 42.1% in data compression, scoring 393071 against 276539. Data encryption shows a 40.5% edge, with 30022 versus 21367. Extended instructions favor the 245HX by 30.6% (31212 vs 23906). Floating point math sees a 43.6% gap (120735 vs 84067), and integer math is 41.9% higher (92150 vs 64934). Random string sorting adds a 39.7% advantage (47616 vs 34082). Even the find prime numbers test, which usually favors efficiency-focused chips, shows the 245HX ahead by 18.1% (359 vs 304).

The multi-thread PassMark score gives the 245HX a 32.6% lead, with 38069 versus 28717. Single-thread PassMark is closer, but still clearly in the 245HX's favor: 4481 versus 4180, a 7.2% margin. That narrower single-thread gap suggests the 338H's architecture is competitive in basic single-core throughput, but falls far behind once parallelism and sustained load come into play.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX is the clear winner for compute-heavy tasks. Its Cinebench results, especially the 98.1% lead in R23 multi-core and the 123.5% lead in R23 single-core, indicate strong performance for CPU rendering, video encoding, and other threaded workloads. The PassMark floating point and integer math results, with leads of 43.6% and 41.9%, point to a processor that handles scientific calculations, financial modeling, and general number crunching with much higher throughput. Data compression and encryption workloads also favor the 245HX, making it the better choice for archiving, database work, and secure communications tasks.

The 338H's only recorded win is in PassMark physics, where it scores 2697 versus 2526. That 6.3% advantage suggests the 338H's Panther Lake design handles simulated physics calculations slightly better, which could matter for lightweight engineering simulations or certain game physics workloads. The 338H also has a much lower TDP of 25 watts against the 245HX's 55 watts, so in thermally constrained or battery-powered systems, it could sustain lower-intensity workloads with less power draw. The PassMark single-thread score of 4180, while 7.2% behind the 245HX, is still respectable and indicates decent general responsiveness for everyday applications.

For users prioritizing maximum performance in multi-threaded applications, the 245HX is the obvious choice. For scenarios where power efficiency and a smaller physical footprint matter more than peak throughput, the 338H offers a viable alternative, though its benchmark scores are consistently lower.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families. The 245HX is part of Core Ultra Series 2, built on Arrow Lake with the Arrow Lake-HX codename. The 338H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3, using Panther Lake with the Panther Lake-H codename. Both are fabricated on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ. The 245HX is produced by TSMC, while the 338H is made by Intel's own fabs. The 245HX uses the Intel BGA 2114 socket, while the 338H uses Intel BGA 2540, so they are not interchangeable in a motherboard.

Core counts differ as well. The 245HX has 14 cores and 14 threads, all of which appear to be full cores without hyperthreading, given that thread count equals core count. The 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads, also without hyperthreading. The 245HX carries a larger L3 cache at 24 MB shared, versus 18 MB shared on the 338H. L1 cache is identical at 192 KB per core. L2 cache differs slightly: 3 MB per core on the 245HX, 2.5 MB per core on the 338H.

Memory support separates the two as well. The 245HX supports DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The 338H uses LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. That higher bandwidth on the 338H does not translate into better overall benchmark performance, but it could benefit memory-sensitive workloads not captured in the recorded tests. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs sharply. The 245HX provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 338H provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. That makes the 245HX far more suitable for systems with multiple high-speed storage devices or discrete GPUs. Integrated graphics also differ: the 245HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 48 execution units, while the 338H uses Arc B370. Multiplier unlocking is another distinction: the 245HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the 338H does not, meaning the 245HX is the only one of the two that allows user-based overclocking.

Specification Differences

The clock speeds and power figures set the two apart clearly. The 245HX has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 338H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The 245HX's higher clocks explain much of its benchmark dominance, especially in single-threaded tests.

TDP is a major differentiator. The 245HX is rated at 55 watts, while the 338H is rated at 25 watts. That 30-watt gap means the 338H is designed for much lower power envelopes, likely for thinner laptops or fanless designs, while the 245HX is aimed at larger, performance-oriented machines.

The 245HX has 14 cores versus 12 on the 338H. Thread counts follow the same ratio: 14 versus 12. The 245HX has a larger L3 cache (24 MB vs 18 MB) and a larger L2 per core (3 MB vs 2.5 MB). Memory type differs: DDR5 on the 245HX, LPDDR5X on the 338H. Memory bandwidth favors the 338H at 136.5 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lanes heavily favor the 245HX at 20 Gen 5 lanes versus 4 Gen 5 lanes. The 245HX has an unlocked multiplier; the 338H does not. Sockets differ, as do part numbers: SRVFM for the 245HX, SA4REQ9EW for the 338H. Release dates also differ, with the 245HX appearing on 2025-01-12 and the 338H on 2026-01-04.

In the database's overall rankings, the 245HX sits at the 90th percentile among all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 48287. The 338H sits at the 84th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 33989. That is a 42% gap in average score, consistent with the head-to-head deltas seen across individual tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX has an average benchmark score of 48287, compared to 33989 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The 245HX scores 4568 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the 338H scores 2044, giving the 245HX a 123.5% advantage.

Q: Does the 338H win any benchmark tests?

A: Yes, the 338H wins the PassMark physics test with a score of 2697, against 2526 for the 245HX, a 6.3% margin.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two chips?

A: The 245HX is rated at 55 watts, while the 338H is rated at 25 watts, a difference of 30 watts.

Q: Which processor supports more PCIe lanes?

A: The 245HX supports Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 338H supports Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU.

Q: Are the two processors built on the same process node?

A: Both use a 3 nm process, but the 245HX is produced by TSMC, while the 338H is produced by Intel.