Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX vs Intel Core Ultra 9 386H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX records an average benchmark score of 48287, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 386H scores 43210. This places the Ultra 5 at the 90th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 88th percentile for the Ultra 9.

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

A: The Ultra 5 245HX delivers a score of 32358, which is 57.5% higher than the Ultra 9 386H's 20547. This is the largest multi-core margin in the head-to-head results.

Q: Which processor wins in PassMark physics testing?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H is the only test winner for that chip, scoring 3028 in PassMark physics compared to 2526 for the Ultra 5 245HX, a 16.6% advantage.

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

A: The Ultra 5 245HX scores 4568 versus 2071.5 for the Ultra 9 386H, a 120.5% difference. This is the largest single-test delta recorded between the two.

Q: Do both processors use the same process node?

A: Both are built on a 3 nm process, but the foundries differ. The Ultra 5 245HX is fabricated by TSMC, while the Ultra 9 386H is fabricated by Intel.

Q: How does memory bandwidth differ between the two?

A: The Ultra 5 245HX supports DDR5 with 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Ultra 9 386H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with 115.2 GB/s bandwidth, a higher figure.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, using the Arrow Lake architecture with the codename Arrow Lake-HX. The Intel Core Ultra 9 386H belongs to Core Ultra Series 3, built on the Panther Lake architecture. The generation field lists the Ultra 5 as Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake-HX) and the Ultra 9 as Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H).

Core counts differ despite naming. The Ultra 5 245HX has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the Ultra 9 386H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither supports simultaneous multithreading, as thread counts equal core counts for both.

Clock speeds favor the Ultra 5. Its base clock is 3.10 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Ultra 9 runs at 2.10 GHz base and 4.90 GHz boost. The Ultra 5 also has an unlocked multiplier, whereas the Ultra 9 does not.

Cache geometry diverges. Both share 192 KB L1 per core. The L2 cache is 3 MB per core on the Ultra 5 versus 2.5 MB per core on the Ultra 9. Shared L3 totals 24 MB on the Ultra 5 and 18 MB on the Ultra 9.

The process node is identical at 3 nm, but the foundry differs. TSMC produces the Arrow Lake die, while Intel fabricates the Panther Lake die. The Ultra 5 has a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. No die size or transistor count is recorded for the Ultra 9.

Memory support differs. The Ultra 5 lists DDR5 only, while the Ultra 9 lists DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use a dual-channel memory bus. The memory bandwidth is 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 5 and 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 9.

PCIe lanes differ. The Ultra 5 provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU-only lanes. The Ultra 9 provides Gen 5 with 12 CPU-only lanes.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Ultra 5 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 48 execution units. The Ultra 9 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics, with no EU count recorded.

Sockets are incompatible. The Ultra 5 uses Intel BGA 2114, while the Ultra 9 uses Intel BGA 2540. TDP ratings also diverge: 55 W for the Ultra 5 versus 25 W for the Ultra 9. Release dates are separate, with the Ultra 5 released on 2025-01-12 and the Ultra 9 on 2026-01-04. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results contain 17 recorded comparisons. The Ultra 5 245HX wins 16 of them; the Ultra 9 386H wins one.

The single-core Cinebench R23 result is the defining gap. The Ultra 5 scores 4568 against 2071.5 for the Ultra 9, a 120.5% lead. This is the largest delta in the entire dataset. The Cinebench R15 single-core test shows a similar pattern, with 460 versus 303.5, a 51.6% advantage for the Ultra 5.

Multi-core results also favor the Ultra 5, though the magnitude varies. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra 5 scores 32358 versus 20547, a 57.5% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a smaller gap: 13590 versus 12820, a 6% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core is closer still, 3261 versus 3223, just 1.2% apart.

The Ultra 9's only win comes in PassMark physics. Its score of 3028 beats the Ultra 5's 2526 by 16.6%. This is notable because the Ultra 9 has more cores, 16 versus 14, yet it trails in most other tests.

PassMark integer math favors the Ultra 5 at 92150 versus 87284, a 5.6% lead. Floating point math shows a larger gap: 120735 versus 108527, an 11.2% advantage. Data compression results are 393071 versus 352365, an 11.6% lead. Data encryption scores 30022 versus 27150, a 10.6% lead.

Extended instructions test results are 31212 versus 29138, a 7.1% lead for the Ultra 5. Find prime numbers scores 359 versus 341, a 5.3% lead. Random string sorting scores 47616 versus 42135, a 13% lead.

PassMark multithread results show 38069 for the Ultra 5 versus 35399 for the Ultra 9, a 7.5% lead. PassMark single-thread results are 4481 versus 4218, a 6.2% lead. The duplicate passmark_singlethread test shows the same figures.

Cinebench R20 single-core results are close in percentage terms: 1918 versus 1809, a 6% lead. Cinebench R15 multi-core is the narrowest result at 1.2%, indicating near parity in that legacy workload.

The average benchmark scores reflect the overall distribution. The Ultra 5's 48287 average is 11.8% higher than the Ultra 9's 43210, consistent with the majority of test wins.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra 5 245HX as the stronger performer in nearly every measured workload. Its 16 out of 17 head-to-head wins include decisive margins in both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. The 120.5% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the clearest signal of its advantage in lightly threaded tasks.

The Ultra 5 also holds the higher average benchmark score, 48287 versus 43210, and the higher percentile ranking, 90 versus 88. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-14600K at 48618, a 0.7% gap, and the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 380 at 48171, a 0.2% gap. The Ultra 9's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen AI Max PRO 385 at 43326, a 0.3% gap, and the Intel Core i9-12900 at 42906, a 0.7% gap.

The Ultra 9 386H does have one meaningful advantage: PassMark physics, where it outperforms the Ultra 5 by 16.6%. It also carries a higher memory bandwidth figure, 115.2 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, and supports LPDDR5X in addition to DDR5. Its 25 W TDP is lower than the 55 W TDP of the Ultra 5, which may matter in thermally constrained mobile designs.

For users prioritizing raw compute across Cinebench and PassMark workloads, the Ultra 5 245HX is the data-backed choice. Its higher clock speeds, larger L3 cache, and higher TDP align with its benchmark dominance. The Ultra 9 386H appears optimized for a different balance, favoring physics performance and power efficiency, but the recorded results show it behind in the majority of tests.

The benchmark database does not include pricing, so no cost-based judgment is possible. The decision rests on workload priorities. Multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, and single-thread responsiveness all favor the Ultra 5. Physics simulation is the one area where the Ultra 9 leads.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded fields:

• Series: Core Ultra Series 2 for the Ultra 5 245HX; Core Ultra Series 3 for the Ultra 9 386H.
• Architecture: Arrow Lake for the Ultra 5; Panther Lake for the Ultra 9.
• Codename: Arrow Lake-HX for the Ultra 5; Panther Lake for the Ultra 9.
• Generation: Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake-HX) for the Ultra 5; Ultra 9 (Panther Lake-H) for the Ultra 9.
• Cores: 14 for the Ultra 5; 16 for the Ultra 9.
• Threads: 14 for the Ultra 5; 16 for the Ultra 9.
• Base clock: 3.10 GHz for the Ultra 5; 2.10 GHz for the Ultra 9.
• Boost clock: 5.10 GHz for the Ultra 5; 4.90 GHz for the Ultra 9.
• TDP: 55 W for the Ultra 5; 25 W for the Ultra 9.
• Socket: Intel BGA 2114 for the Ultra 5; Intel BGA 2540 for the Ultra 9.
• Foundry: TSMC for the Ultra 5; Intel for the Ultra 9.
• Transistors: 17,800 million for the Ultra 5; not recorded for the Ultra 9.
• Die size: 243 mm² for the Ultra 5; not recorded for the Ultra 9.
• L2 cache: 3 MB per core for the Ultra 5; 2.5 MB per core for the Ultra 9.
• L3 cache: 24 MB shared for the Ultra 5; 18 MB shared for the Ultra 9.
• Memory support: DDR5 for the Ultra 5; DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 9.
• Memory bandwidth: 102.4 GB/s for the Ultra 5; 115.2 GB/s for the Ultra 9.
• PCIe lanes: Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) for the Ultra 5; Gen 5, 12 lanes (CPU only) for the Ultra 9.
• Integrated graphics: Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 48EU for the Ultra 5; Intel Xe3 Graphics for the Ultra 9.
• Multiplier unlocked: true for the Ultra 5; false for the Ultra 9.
• Part number: SRVFM for the Ultra 5; SA4R5Q9EH for the Ultra 9.
• Release date: 2025-01-12 for the Ultra 5; 2026-01-04 for the Ultra 9.

Fields that are identical include the 3 nm process node, 192 KB L1 cache per core, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support set to false for both, mobile market segment, and Active production status. Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP.