Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX vs Intel Core Ultra 7 356H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data shows a dominant performance profile for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX against the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H. Across 17 head-to-head comparisons, the Ultra 5 245HX claims 16 victories, with the Ultra 7 356H taking only a single win. The magnitude of the Ultra 5 245HX's advantage varies sharply by workload, ranging from a narrow 6.7% lead in Cinebench R15 multi-core to a massive 123.9% margin in Cinebench R23 single-core.

The single-core results are where the Ultra 5 245HX makes its strongest statement. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Ultra 5 245HX scores 4568 against 2040 for the Ultra 7 356H, a 123.9% advantage. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 51.8% lead, with scores of 460 versus 303. Cinebench R20 single-core narrows the gap to 11.8%, with 1918 against 1715. PassMark single-thread testing confirms the pattern at a smaller scale: 4481 versus 4072, a 10% edge for the Ultra 5 245HX.

Multi-core performance tells a more nuanced story. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 245HX scores 32358 versus 18395 for the Ultra 7 356H, a 75.9% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows an 11.8% advantage (13590 versus 12153), while Cinebench R15 multi-core is the closest contest at 6.7% (3261 versus 3055). PassMark multi-thread results give the Ultra 5 245HX a 12% edge, with 38069 against 33978.

The PassMark suite splits into two clear groups. In compute-heavy integer and floating-point workloads, the Ultra 5 245HX leads by moderate margins: integer math at 92150 versus 83111 (10.9%), floating-point math at 120735 versus 103128 (17.1%), and extended instructions at 31212 versus 27898 (11.9%). Data compression shows a 16.9% advantage (393071 versus 336177), data encryption a 14% lead (30022 versus 26345), and random string sorting a 16.2% edge (47616 versus 40990). Prime number finding is closer at 9.8%, with 359 versus 327.

The single exception is PassMark physics, where the Ultra 7 356H wins with 2895 against 2526, a 12.7% advantage. This is the only benchmark in the entire dataset where the Ultra 7 356H outperforms its rival, and it stands in contrast to the otherwise consistent pattern of Ultra 5 245HX superiority.

Average benchmark scores reinforce the head-to-head results. The Ultra 5 245HX posts an average score of 48287, placing it in the 90th percentile among all CPUs. The Ultra 7 356H averages 41215, which lands in the 87th percentile. The gap between their averages is roughly 17%, consistent with the multi-threaded results seen in Cinebench and PassMark.

Looking at nearest rivals provides additional context for each processor's standing. The Ultra 5 245HX sits within 0.7% of the Intel Core i5-14600K (48618), 0.4% of the AMD EPYC 4345P (48470), and within 0.2% of both the Intel Core Ultra 5 235A (48201) and AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 (48171). The Ultra 7 356H, meanwhile, matches the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440 (41208) exactly at 0% delta, sits 0.1% behind the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H (41263), 0.4% behind the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X (41376), and 0.6% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra X7 358H (40967). These figures place the Ultra 5 245HX in a higher performance tier overall, despite both processors belonging to Intel's mobile lineup.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear overall winner: the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX. It wins 16 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks and holds a higher average benchmark score (48287 versus 41215) and a higher percentile ranking (90th versus 87th). The largest margins come in single-core Cinebench R23, where the Ultra 5 245HX is 123.9% ahead, and in multi-core Cinebench R23, where it leads by 75.9%. These are not marginal differences; they indicate a substantially faster processor for most workloads.

The Ultra 7 356H's only victory comes in PassMark physics, where it leads by 12.7%. This single result does not offset the broader pattern of defeats, but it does suggest a specific strength in physics simulation tasks. The Ultra 7 356H also carries a lower TDP of 25 watts against 55 watts for the Ultra 5 245HX, which may matter in thermally constrained chassis, though the benchmark data does not directly quantify power efficiency.

From the recorded measurements, the Ultra 5 245HX is the stronger processor for users who prioritize raw compute performance. Its 14 cores and 14 threads, combined with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz, deliver consistently higher scores across Cinebench and PassMark suites. The Ultra 7 356H, with 16 cores and 16 threads but a lower boost clock of 4.70 GHz, cannot match that output in most tests.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 5 245HX wins in every major category except physics simulation. Its strengths are most pronounced in single-threaded performance, where the Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4568 versus 2040 represents a 123.9% advantage. This makes it the better choice for applications that rely heavily on per-core speed, such as many productivity tools and lightly threaded software.

In multi-threaded rendering and content creation, the Ultra 5 245HX also leads decisively. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 32358 against 18395 is a 75.9% gap, and Cinebench R20 multi-core shows an 11.8% lead. PassMark multi-thread confirms the pattern at 38069 versus 33978, a 12% margin. For video encoding, 3D rendering, and compilation workloads, the recorded data favors the Ultra 5 245HX.

Data-heavy workloads follow the same trend. The Ultra 5 245HX leads in data compression by 16.9%, data encryption by 14%, and random string sorting by 16.2%. Floating-point math shows a 17.1% advantage, and integer math a 10.9% edge. These results suggest the Ultra 5 245HX handles general-purpose compute tasks with greater throughput.

The Ultra 7 356H claims one niche: PassMark physics, where it scores 2895 versus 2526. This 12.7% win indicates a relative strength in physics calculations, which could benefit certain simulation or game-physics workloads. However, with only one benchmark victory out of 17, the Ultra 7 356H's overall case is weak. Its lower TDP of 25 watts may make it more suitable for thin-and-light designs, but the performance data does not show a compensating advantage outside of physics.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core Cinebench R23 score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX scores 4568 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H scores 2040. The Ultra 5 245HX leads by 123.9%.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core Cinebench R23?

A: The Ultra 5 245HX scores 32358, and the Ultra 7 356H scores 18395. The Ultra 5 245HX holds a 75.9% advantage in this test.

Q: Does the Ultra 7 356H win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Ultra 7 356H wins PassMark physics with a score of 2895 against 2526 for the Ultra 5 245HX, a 12.7% margin. This is its only win across 17 head-to-head tests.

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

A: The Ultra 5 245HX has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Ultra 7 356H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Despite having more cores, the Ultra 7 356H loses most multi-core benchmarks.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Ultra 5 245HX has an average benchmark score of 48287, placing it in the 90th percentile. The Ultra 7 356H averages 41215, placing it in the 87th percentile.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Ultra 5 245HX boosts to 5.10 GHz, while the Ultra 7 356H boosts to 4.70 GHz. The higher boost clock contributes to the Ultra 5 245HX's single-core advantages.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different architectures. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX belongs to Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Arrow Lake-HX codename. It is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core Ultra 7 356H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3 and uses the Panther Lake architecture with the same codename. It is also built on a 3 nm process, but at Intel's own foundry.

Core configurations differ despite the Ultra 7 356H having more cores. The Ultra 5 245HX packs 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Ultra 7 356H offers 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor supports simultaneous multithreading, as thread counts equal core counts for both. The Ultra 5 245HX has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Ultra 7 356H has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The lower clocks on the Ultra 7 356H help explain its performance deficit in most tests.

Cache hierarchies also differ. Both processors use 192 KB of L1 cache per core. The Ultra 5 245HX has 3 MB of L2 cache per core and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 356H has 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger cache allocations on the Ultra 5 245HX likely contribute to its single-core and multi-core advantages.

Memory support shows some variation. The Ultra 5 245HX supports DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Ultra 7 356H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a dual-channel bus with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Ultra 7 356H has higher memory bandwidth, but this does not translate into benchmark wins. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity differs between the two. The Ultra 5 245HX offers PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 7 356H offers PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Ultra 5 245HX provides more expansion lanes for high-speed peripherals.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Ultra 5 245HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 48 execution units. The Ultra 7 356H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. The recorded data does not include graphics benchmarks, so no performance comparison is possible from these measurements.

Thermal design power differs substantially. The Ultra 5 245HX has a TDP of 55 watts, while the Ultra 7 356H has a TDP of 25 watts. The Ultra 7 356H is designed for lower power envelopes, which may suit thinner laptops, but the performance cost is evident across most benchmarks. The Ultra 5 245HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Ultra 7 356H does not, giving the former additional flexibility for overclocking in systems that allow it.

Sockets also differ. The Ultra 5 245HX uses Intel BGA 2114, while the Ultra 7 356H uses Intel BGA 2540. This means the two processors are not socket-compatible and cannot be swapped in the same motherboard. The Ultra 5 245HX was released in January 2025, and the Ultra 7 356H followed in January 2026. Both processors are marked as active in production. The Ultra 5 245HX's part number is SRVFM, and the Ultra 7 356H's part number is SA4RGQ9EU.