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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear overall winner in the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T, which takes 15 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests. The most decisive margin comes in PassMark integer math, where the 245T scores 88,676 against 62,070 for the 336H, a 42.9% advantage. Floating point math also favors the desktop part heavily, with 108,499 versus 82,415, a 31.6% gap. These two results indicate substantially stronger raw arithmetic throughput for the 245T, which is relevant for scientific computing and number-crunching workloads.

The Cinebench suite shows consistent single-core and multi-core leads for the 245T across all three versions. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the 245T records 26,208 while the 336H manages 23,991, a 9.2% difference. Single-core in R23 shows the same 9.2% delta, with scores of 3,699 versus 3,387. The R15 and R20 variants mirror this pattern, with the 245T leading by 9.1% or 9.2% in every case. This consistency across rendering generations suggests a fundamental clock and architecture advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Data encryption favors the 245T by 11.1%, with scores of 23,656 versus 21,291. Prime number finding shows an 8.4% edge for the 245T, scoring 324 against 299. PassMark multithread delivers 30,833 for the 245T versus 28,545 for the 336H, an 8% lead. Single-thread performance also goes to the 245T, with 4,367 versus 4,013, an 8.8% advantage.

The 336H wins two tests. Extended instructions show the mobile part ahead with 24,542 versus 22,071, a 10.1% margin. PassMark physics also favors the 336H, scoring 2,682 against 2,278, a 15.1% advantage. These wins indicate the 336H handles certain specialized instruction sets and physics simulations more efficiently, despite losing most other workloads.

Data compression and random string sorting are close calls. The 245T wins compression with 283,812 versus 280,340, a narrow 1.2% edge. Random string sorting shows 34,931 against 34,402, a 1.5% lead for the 245T. These near-ties suggest the two processors are comparable in memory-heavy data manipulation tasks.

Overall average benchmark scores place the 245T at 38,194, which sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The 336H averages 34,485, at the 84th percentile. The 245T sits within 0.1% of the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and the Intel Core i5-14490F, and within 0.2% of the Intel Core i5-13600HX and i5-13600KF. The 336H is similarly close to its rival group, within 0.2% of the Core i7-13700HX and 0.8% of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and target different market segments. The Core Ultra 5 245T belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, uses Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-S codename, and targets desktop systems on the Intel Socket 1851. The Core Ultra 5 336H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3, uses Panther Lake architecture, and targets mobile systems on the Intel BGA 2540 socket.

Both processors use a 3 nm process node, but they come from different foundries. The 245T is fabricated by TSMC, while the 336H is fabricated by Intel. The 245T uses 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The 336H does not have transistor or die size data recorded in the database.

Core counts differ. The 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads, while the 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Neither processor supports hyper-threading based on the thread counts matching core counts. The 336H has more physical cores but delivers lower benchmark scores in most tests, which points to clock speed and per-core efficiency differences.

Cache configurations differ as well. Both share a 192 KB L1 cache per core. The L2 cache is 3 MB per core on the 245T versus 2.5 MB per core on the 336H. The shared L3 cache is 24 MB on the 245T versus 18 MB on the 336H. The larger L2 and L3 caches on the desktop part likely contribute to its lead in data-heavy workloads.

Clock speeds show a clear advantage for the 245T. Its base clock is 2.20 GHz with a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The 336H has a 1.90 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost clock. The 245T also carries a higher TDP at 65 watts versus 25 watts for the 336H, reflecting the desktop part's greater power envelope.

Memory support differs. The 245T supports DDR5 only, while the 336H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The 245T has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the 336H records 115.2 GB/s. The 336H also supports lower-power mobile memory, which is typical for laptops. ECC memory is supported on the 245T but not on the 336H.

PCIe lanes differ. The 245T provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU, while the 336H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics also differ: the 245T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 64 execution units, while the 336H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.

The release dates are separated by a year. The 245T launched on January 6, 2025, with a launch MSRP of $270. The 336H launched on January 4, 2026, with no launch MSRP recorded. Both are currently marked as active production parts, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T leads in every Cinebench multi-core test. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 26,208 versus 23,991 for the 336H, a 9.2% advantage. The R15 and R20 versions show the same 9.2% gap, with scores of 2,641 versus 2,418 and 11,007 versus 10,076 respectively.

Q: Does the 336H win any benchmark categories?

A: Yes, the 336H wins two tests. It scores 24,542 in PassMark extended instructions versus 22,071 for the 245T, a 10.1% edge. In PassMark physics, it records 2,682 against 2,278, a 15.1% advantage.

Q: What explains the 245T's large lead in integer and floating point math?

A: The desktop part benefits from higher clock speeds, with a 5.10 GHz boost versus 4.60 GHz on the mobile part, plus larger caches. The 245T scores 88,676 in integer math versus 62,070 for the 336H, a 42.9% gap, and 108,499 in floating point versus 82,415, a 31.6% gap.

Q: Are these processors comparable in memory-bound tasks?

A: They are very close. The 245T wins data compression with 283,812 versus 280,340, only a 1.2% difference. Random string sorting shows 34,931 versus 34,402, a 1.5% edge for the 245T. The 336H actually has higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s, which helps explain the near-ties.

Q: How do the core counts compare?

A: The 336H has 16 cores and 16 threads, two more cores than the 245T, which has 14 cores and 14 threads. Despite the core deficit, the 245T wins most multi-threaded benchmarks due to higher clocks and larger caches.

Q: What is the market positioning of each processor?

A: The 245T is a desktop processor on Socket 1851 with a 65-watt TDP and a launch MSRP of $270. The 336H is a mobile processor on BGA 2540 with a 25-watt TDP and no launch MSRP recorded. The 245T sits at the 86th percentile of all CPUs, while the 336H sits at the 84th percentile.

The Verdict

The data supports choosing the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T for almost any compute-heavy workload. It wins 15 of 17 head-to-head tests, including every Cinebench rendering test, all PassMark math tests, encryption, compression, and single-thread performance. Its 42.9% lead in integer math and 31.6% lead in floating point are decisive for scientific or engineering applications. The 245T also carries a higher boost clock of 5.10 GHz versus 4.60 GHz, larger L2 and L3 caches, and ECC memory support, which matters for stability in professional workstations.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H makes sense for specific scenarios. Its two wins come in extended instructions and physics, so workloads that rely heavily on those instruction paths could see better results. The mobile part also supports LPDDR5X memory and has higher memory bandwidth at 115.2 GB/s, which narrows the gap in data compression and string sorting. The 336H's 25-watt TDP makes it the only viable choice for laptops and other power-constrained systems, though its lower clocks and smaller caches cost it most benchmark victories.

Neither processor is unlocked for overclocking, so the recorded performance represents the practical ceiling for both. The 245T's nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 7 250 and Intel Core i5-13600KF, all within 0.2% of its average score. The 336H sits closest to the Intel Core i7-13700HX, within 0.2%, and the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350, within 0.8%.

Specification Differences

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

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

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

| Cores | 14 | 16 |

| Threads | 14 | 16 |

| Base clock | 2.20 GHz | 1.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.10 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1851 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Architecture | Arrow Lake | Panther Lake |

| Codename | Arrow Lake-S | Panther Lake |

| Process node | 3 nm | 3 nm |

| 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 |

| ECC memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe lanes | Gen 5, 20 lanes | Gen 5, 12 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | January 6, 2025 | January 4, 2026 |

| Launch MSRP | $270 | Not recorded |

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins in rendering, math, encryption, compression, and single-thread performance. It is the better choice for desktop builds where power draw is not a primary constraint and maximum compute throughput is required. The 245T's 65-watt TDP and Socket 1851 platform suit fixed workstations, and its ECC memory support adds reliability for data integrity-sensitive tasks. The 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more expansion headroom for GPUs and storage devices.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 336H wins in extended instructions and physics simulation. It is the better choice for mobile systems where the 25-watt TDP is essential for battery life and thermal management. The 336H supports both DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, giving laptop designers flexibility, and its higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s helps close the gap in memory-heavy tasks. The 12 PCIe Gen 5 lanes are sufficient for typical laptop configurations.

For users comparing these two, the decision comes down to platform and workload. Desktop users with room for a 65-watt part should take the 245T almost without exception. Mobile users who need a capable processor in a laptop form factor have the 336H as the only option, and its physics and extended instruction strengths provide specific benefits. The 245T's 9.2% advantage across all Cinebench tests and its 42.9% integer math lead make it the stronger processor by the recorded data, while the 336H's wins in specialized tests prevent it from being a complete loss.