Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF vs Intel Core Ultra 5 336H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded benchmark data shows a complete sweep for the Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF, which wins all 17 head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core Ultra 5 336H. The 245KF dominates across every category, from multi-core rendering to single-threaded workloads. This is not a close contest; the margins range from 11.8% in PassMark physics to 64.1% in data compression.

The 245KF is clearly the stronger desktop part. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 36647 versus 23991 for the 336H indicates a 52.8% advantage in heavily threaded tasks. Single-core performance also favors the 245KF, with a 52.7% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core (5173 versus 3387). The desktop chip also leads in memory-sensitive workloads like PassMark integer math (98854 versus 62070, a 59.3% delta) and floating-point math (131546 versus 82415, a 59.6% delta).

The 336H, despite its 16 cores versus 14 for the 245KF, loses every test. Its closest result is PassMark physics, where it trails by only 11.8% (2682 versus 2998). The 336H also comes within 17.5% in PassMark single-thread (4013 versus 4715). These two metrics suggest the mobile chip holds up reasonably in lightly threaded or physics-based workloads, but it falls far behind in everything else. The 336H's other results show deficits of at least 39.1% (find prime numbers) and often exceed 50%.

The data indicates no scenario where the 336H takes a win. The 245KF's average benchmark score of 55093 places it at the 91st percentile of all CPUs, while the 336H's 34485 average places it at the 84th percentile. The 245KF also sits among stronger rivals: it is 0.6% ahead of the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (54762) and 1.9% ahead of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053). The 336H, by contrast, sits nearly level with the Intel Core i7-13700HX (34554, a -0.2% delta) and the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333, a 0.4% delta).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and foundries. The 245KF belongs to Core Ultra Series 2, uses the Arrow Lake-S architecture on the Intel Socket 1851, and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm process. The 336H is a Core Ultra Series 3 part, uses the Panther Lake architecture on the Intel BGA 2540 socket, and is fabricated by Intel on the same 3 nm process node. Both have 192 KB of L1 cache per core, but the L2 and L3 caches differ: the 245KF has 3 MB per core L2 and 24 MB shared L3, while the 336H has 2.5 MB per core L2 and 18 MB shared L3.

The 245KF is a desktop part with a 125 W TDP, a base clock of 4.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. It has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking. The 336H is a mobile part with a 25 W TDP, a base clock of 1.90 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Its multiplier is locked. The 245KF has no integrated graphics, while the 336H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics. The 245KF also offers more PCIe lanes: Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only) for the 336H.

Memory support differs as well. The 245KF supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The 336H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a higher bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. Neither part supports ECC memory. The 245KF has a transistor count of 17,800 million on a 243 mm² die, while the 336H's transistor count and die size are not recorded. The 245KF was released on 2024-10-23 with a launch MSRP of $294; the 336H's release date is 2026-01-04 with no launch MSRP recorded.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core rendering?

A: The 245KF leads by 52.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (36647 versus 23991) and by 52.7% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (15391 versus 10076). The desktop chip also wins Cinebench R15 multi-core by 52.7% (3693 versus 2418).

Q: How large is the single-core advantage?

A: The 245KF is 52.7% ahead in Cinebench R23 single-core (5173 versus 3387) and 52.8% ahead in Cinebench R15 single-core (521 versus 341). In PassMark single-thread, the lead narrows to 17.5% (4715 versus 4013).

Q: Does the 336H's higher core count help it win any workload?

A: No. Despite having 16 cores versus 14, the 336H loses all 17 recorded benchmarks. Its smallest deficit is 11.8% in PassMark physics (2682 versus 2998).

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The 336H supports a higher bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, compared to 102.4 GB/s for the 245KF. However, the 245KF still wins memory-intensive tests like PassMark data compression by 64.1% (460123 versus 280340).

Q: Which CPU has integrated graphics?

A: The 336H includes Intel Xe3 Graphics, while the 245KF has no integrated graphics. This makes the 336H suitable for systems without a discrete GPU.

Q: How do the two compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The 245KF has an average score of 55093, which is 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D (54762) and 1.9% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (54053). The 336H's average of 34485 is 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-13700HX (34554) and 0.4% above the Intel Core i5-13450HX (34333).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF | Intel Core Ultra 5 336H |

|----------------|---------------------------|--------------------------|

| Series | Core Ultra Series 2 | Core Ultra Series 3 |

| Cores | 14 | 16 |

| Threads | 14 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 4.20 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 125 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Arrow Lake-S | Panther Lake |

| Generation | Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) | Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H) |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Transistors | 17,800 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 243 mm² | Not recorded |

| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 102.4 GB/s | 115.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 12 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | N/A | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2024-10-23 | 2026-01-04 |

| Launch MSRP | $294 | None recorded |

| Multiplier Unlocked | True | False |

| Part Number | SRQCY | SA4RD |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The widest margin in the data set is PassMark data compression, where the 245KF scores 460123 versus 280340, a 64.1% lead. This indicates a substantial advantage in compression and decompression workloads, likely due to higher clock speeds and larger caches. The second-largest gap is PassMark random string sorting at 60.5% (55206 versus 34402), followed by floating-point math at 59.6% (131546 versus 82415) and integer math at 59.3% (98854 versus 62070). These results show the 245KF is dramatically faster in arithmetic and sorting tasks.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent 52.7% to 52.8% leads for the 245KF across R15, R20, and R23, for both multi-core and single-core. Specifically, R15 multi-core is 3693 versus 2418, R20 multi-core is 15391 versus 10076, and R23 multi-core is 36647 versus 23991. Single-core scores follow the same pattern: R15 is 521 versus 341, R20 is 2172 versus 1422, and R23 is 5173 versus 3387. The uniformity of these deltas suggests the 245KF's clock advantage (5.20 GHz boost versus 4.60 GHz) is the dominant factor.

PassMark data encryption shows a 56.8% lead (33381 versus 21291), and extended instructions show a 54.5% lead (37912 versus 24542). The 245KF also leads in PassMark multithread by 51% (43110 versus 28545). The smallest wins for the 245KF are PassMark physics at 11.8% (2998 versus 2682) and PassMark single-thread at 17.5% (4715 versus 4013). These smaller margins indicate that the 336H is relatively competitive in physics simulations and basic single-thread tasks, but the overall trend is unmistakable: the 245KF outperforms the 336H in every recorded metric.

The Verdict

The data shows a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF is the superior processor for performance, winning every benchmark in the database. Its 91st percentile ranking versus the 336H's 84th percentile confirms the separation. The 245KF also compares favorably to its own rivals, sitting 0.6% above the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X3D and 1.9% above the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K. The 336H, meanwhile, sits in a lower performance tier, matching the Intel Core i7-13700HX and Intel Core i5-13450HX almost exactly.

For desktop users seeking maximum compute throughput, the 245KF is the choice. Its higher clocks, larger caches, and unlocked multiplier enable better multi-core and single-core results. The absence of integrated graphics is a non-issue for systems with a discrete GPU. The 336H, as a mobile part with a 25 W TDP, is designed for laptops where power efficiency matters. Its integrated Xe3 Graphics and support for LPDDR5X make it suitable for thin-and-light systems, but the benchmark data shows it cannot compete with the 245KF on raw performance.

The 336H's closest performance relative to the 245KF is in physics and single-thread tests, where it trails by only 11.8% and 17.5%, respectively. This suggests the Panther Lake architecture has some strengths in specific workloads, but those strengths do not translate into any benchmark wins. The 245KF's 17-0 record is unambiguous. The verdict is straightforward: the 245KF for performance, the 336H for mobile integration and power efficiency, with no performance-based reason to choose the latter.