OVERALL

SPECS

VS AVERAGE

REVIEWS

ALTERNATIVES

Intel Core Ultra 5 245 Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price in UK: ~£260
Avg. price in US: ~$270
PassMark benchmark result: 39,930
N. of physical cores: 14
CPU boost clock speed: 5.1 GHz

Intel Core Ultra 5 245 review. Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how it ranks among processors and if it is worth buying.

7.8

Very good

7.8

Very good

?

7.7
Gaming
Score components:
30.0%
9.0
PassMark single-core benchmark score
25.0%
8.7
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
20.0%
7.9
CPU boost clock speed
17.0%
4.4
L3 cache
8.0%
5.9
N. of physical cores
6.8
Video editing
Score components:
45.0%
9.0
Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
20.0%
5.9
N. of physical cores
20.0%
4.6
CPU threads
15.0%
4.4
L3 cache

No image

No image

Best prices in UK

N/A~ £260

Best rankings

Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is a mid-range desktop processor based on the Arrow Lake architecture, featuring 14 cores (6 Performance-cores and 8 Efficient-cores) and 14 threads, as it notably omits Hyper-Threading support. It operates with a base frequency of 4.2 GHz for P-cores, a maximum turbo boost of 5.2 GHz, and includes 24 MB of L3 cache and 26 MB of L2 cache on a new LGA 1851 socket. Main characteristics include the integration of a dedicated Neural Processing Unit (NPU) for AI workloads and upgraded Xe-LPG graphics with 64 execution units. Its primary advantages are significantly improved power efficiency and lower operating temperatures compared to previous generations, alongside competitive multi-threaded performance in productivity tasks like rendering. However, it suffers from inconsistent gaming performance that sometimes lags behind the older i5-14600K and requires a mandatory upgrade to a new 800-series motherboard and DDR5 memory.

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core Ultra 5 245

Overall score

7.8

Show more

Hide

?

Popularity

What it is: An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.

When it matters: When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.

Platform

8.8

Show more

Hide

Brand name

What it is: The manufacturer or brand of the product.

When it matters: When you prefer a specific ecosystem, support network, or design philosophy.

Importance: MEDIUM

Intel

Processor type

What it is: The kind of system the processor is built for, such as desktop PCs, laptops, workstations, or servers.

When it matters: When you want a processor meant for the kind of machine you are actually building or buying, rather than a chip aimed at a different class of system.

Importance: HIGH

CPU socket

What it is: The physical socket the processor fits into on the motherboard.

When it matters: When you need to make sure the CPU can actually be installed on a specific motherboard.

Importance: HIGH

Chipset

What it is: The motherboard chipset families officially meant to work with the processor.

When it matters: When you are checking whether a CPU will work with the motherboard features and platform you plan to use.

Importance: HIGH

CPU architecture

What it is: The processor family or design generation behind the chip, such as Zen 4 or Raptor Lake.

When it matters: When you are comparing CPUs across generations and want a clearer sense of their design age, feature level, and expected performance class.

Importance: HIGH

Show more

Performance

7.4

Show more

Hide

N. of physical cores

What it is: The number of physical CPU cores on the processor.

When it matters: When you run workloads that benefit from more real cores.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: 8+

CPU threads

What it is: The total number of processing threads the CPU can handle at once.

When it matters: When you run heavily threaded workloads or multitask a lot.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: 16+

Threads per core

What it is: The number of threads each physical core can handle at once.

When it matters: When you want to understand how much thread-level parallelism each core can provide in multitasking or heavily threaded work.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: 2

CPU boost clock speed

What it is: The highest clock speed the processor can reach under boost conditions.

When it matters: When you care about peak speed in short bursts.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >4.7 GHz

CPU base clock speed

What it is: The processor's normal all-core starting frequency before boost behavior raises clocks temporarily.

When it matters: When you care about steadier performance in longer workloads rather than short burst speed alone.

Importance: MEDIUM

Show more

Cache & Architecture

9.0

Show more

Hide

Semiconductor size

What it is: The manufacturing process node used to produce the processor, usually expressed in nanometers.

When it matters: When efficiency, heat, and the relative modernity of the chip-making process matter to your comparison.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: <10 nm

Foundry

What it is: The semiconductor manufacturer that physically fabricates the processor chip.

When it matters: When process source, manufacturing generation, or foundry differences matter to your comparison more than day-to-day performance alone.

Importance: MEDIUM

L3 cache

What it is: The total amount of L3 cache available on the processor.

When it matters: When you want better performance in cache-sensitive workloads and games.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=16 MB

L2 cache

What it is: The total amount of L2 cache available across the processor.

When it matters: When you want to compare CPU design efficiency and how much fast intermediate cache the cores have available.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=6 MB

L1 cache

What it is: The total amount of L1 cache built into the processor, which sits closest to the cores.

When it matters: When you are comparing low-level CPU design details rather than the broader performance picture buyers usually notice first.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=512 KB

Show more

Memory & PCIe

9.4

Show more

Hide

DDR memory version

What it is: The RAM generation the processor is designed to support, such as DDR4 or DDR5.

When it matters: When you need the CPU to match the kind of memory platform you want to buy or reuse.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: DDR5

Maximum memory speed

What it is: The highest official memory speed supported by the processor.

When it matters: When you choose RAM and want to know the supported speed ceiling.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >=4800 MHz

Max memory speed (JEDEC)

What it is: The highest official RAM speed the processor supports under standard JEDEC settings, before any memory overclocking profiles are applied.

When it matters: When officially supported stock RAM speed matters more than XMP, EXPO, or manual memory tuning.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=5600 MHz

Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)

What it is: The highest memory speed supported through XMP or EXPO profiles.

When it matters: When you want faster RAM through memory profiles.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=5200 MHz

?

Maximum memory capacity

What it is: The largest total amount of memory officially supported by the processor.

When it matters: When you plan a system with very large RAM capacity.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: >=128 GB

Show more

Integrated Graphics

8.7

Show more

Hide

Integrated graphics

What it is: Includes built-in graphics, so the system can output video without a separate graphics card.

When it matters: When you want the PC to work without a dedicated GPU, or you are building an office, media, compact, or troubleshooting-friendly system.

Importance: HIGH

Integrated GPU model

What it is: The model name of the integrated graphics processor, if present.

When it matters: When you plan to use the CPU's built-in graphics.

Importance: MEDIUM

Integrated GPU execution units

What it is: The number of execution units available in the integrated graphics part of the processor.

When it matters: When you plan to rely on built-in graphics and want a better sense of its light gaming, display, or media capability.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=24

Integrated GPU base frequency

What it is: The base operating frequency of the integrated GPU.

When it matters: When integrated graphics performance matters to you.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: >=350 MHz

Integrated media encoders/decoders

What it is: The hardware media formats the processor can encode or decode directly.

When it matters: When you stream, edit video, or rely on hardware media acceleration.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Power & Thermal

5.8

Show more

Hide

TDP (Thermal design power)

What it is: The rated thermal design power, which gives a general idea of cooling and power needs.

When it matters: When you choose a cooler or build in a tighter case.

Importance: HIGH

Good value: <30 W

Base power (PL1)

What it is: The sustained power target used for longer CPU loads.

When it matters: When you choose cooling and power delivery for sustained workloads.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <30 W

Boost power (PL2)

What it is: The short-term boost power limit the processor may draw under heavier turbo loads.

When it matters: When you size cooling and power delivery for peak turbo behavior.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <50 W

Tau (power duration limit)

What it is: The time limit the CPU can stay at higher boost power before dropping toward sustained power.

When it matters: When you want to understand turbo behavior under longer loads.

Importance: MEDIUM

Good value: <=28 s

Configurable TDP

What it is: Allows the processor to run in alternate power modes instead of being fixed to one default TDP target.

When it matters: When you want more control over heat, noise, and power draw in compact systems, quieter builds, or thermally limited machines.

Importance: LOW

Show more

Intel Core Ultra 5 245 vs the average processor

Why is Intel Core Ultra 5 245 better than the average processor?

Show more

Hide

84.8% better single-core performance
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4589 vs 2483). The average processor scores 2483 in PassMark single-core.
What it is: A benchmark score that reflects single-core CPU performance.
When it matters: When you care about responsiveness in lighter or older software.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >3200
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4589 vs 2483). The average processor scores 2483 in PassMark single-core.4,589 vs 2,483
2.02x higher single-core score
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2975 vs 1471). The average processor scores 1471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
What it is: A Geekbench 6 score that reflects single-core CPU performance in mixed modern workloads.
When it matters: When you care about snappy everyday performance in lighter apps, browsing, office work, or tasks that do not scale well across many cores.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >2000
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2975 vs 1471). The average processor scores 1471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.2,975 vs 1,471
3.79x higher PassMark score
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (39930 vs 10532.5). The average processor scores 10532.5 in PassMark benchmark.
What it is: A benchmark score that gives a broad idea of overall processor performance.
When it matters: When you want a quick overall performance comparison.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >19000
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (39930 vs 10532.5). The average processor scores 10532.5 in PassMark benchmark.39,930 vs 10,532.5
10.4x larger L2 cache
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (26 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
What it is: The total amount of L2 cache available across the processor.
When it matters: When you want to compare CPU design efficiency and how much fast intermediate cache the cores have available.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: >=6 MB
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (26 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.26 MB vs 2.5 MB
8 more CPU cores
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
What it is: The number of physical CPU cores on the processor.
When it matters: When you run workloads that benefit from more real cores.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: 8+
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.14 vs 6
More advanced microarchitecture
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).
What it is: The internal core-design codename used for this processor generation.
When it matters: When you are comparing CPUs at a deeper design level and want to identify the exact architecture behind marketing names.
Importance: LOW
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake
18.6% higher boost clock
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
What it is: The highest clock speed the processor can reach under boost conditions.
When it matters: When you care about peak speed in short bursts.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >4.7 GHz
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz
6x more L2 per core
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
E-core module: 4 MB shared
What it is: The amount of L2 cache available to each CPU core.
When it matters: When you are comparing per-core cache resources in deeper architectural analysis.
Importance: LOW
Good value: >=1 MB/core
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
Advanced security extensions
Intel Core Ultra 5245 provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT, TME, TME-MK vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
Modern CPU socket
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1851 vs FP2).
5 year/s newer release date
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a newer release date than the average processor (2025 vs 2020).
Includes crypto acceleration
Intel Core Ultra 5245 includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not.
Supports HMP
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports HMP, the average processor does not.
84.8% better single-core performance
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (4589 vs 2483). The average processor scores 2483 in PassMark single-core.
2.02x higher single-core score
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (2975 vs 1471). The average processor scores 1471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
3.79x higher PassMark score
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (39930 vs 10532.5). The average processor scores 10532.5 in PassMark benchmark.
8 more CPU cores
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more CPU cores than the average processor (14 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
18.6% higher boost clock
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (5.1 GHz vs 4.3 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.3 GHz.
6 more CPU threads
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more CPU threads than the average processor (14 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
10.4x larger L2 cache
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (26 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
More advanced microarchitecture
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Arrow Lake vs Kaby Lake).
6x more L2 per core
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
75% smaller process node
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a lower process node than the average processor (3 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
3x larger L3 cache
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher L3 cache than the average processor (24 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
Uses big.LITTLE design
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a big.LITTLE design, the average processor does not.
More advanced foundry
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (TSMC 3 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
3.67x larger L1 cache
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (1408 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
3.6x more transistors
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more transistors than the average processor (17.8 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
Newer PCIe version
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 vs 3.0).
8 more PCIe lanes
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (24 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
4x more memory capacity
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (256 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
2.24x higher memory bandwidth
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (102.4 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
2.18x higher memory speed
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (6400 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
Supports memory overclocking
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports memory overclocking, the average processor does not.
Newer DDR support
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR5 vs DDR4).
Supports ECC memory
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports ECC memory, the average processor does not.
Higher JEDEC memory speed
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-6400 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
Better integrated GPU
Intel Core Ultra 5245 uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
2.67x more GPU execution units
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more GPU execution units than the average processor (64 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
1 more supported displays
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
Includes stock cooler
Intel Core Ultra 5245 includes a stock cooler, the average processor does not.
5 °C higher TJ Max
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher TJ Max than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.

Cache & Architecture

Integrated Graphics

Power & Thermal

Why is Intel Core Ultra 5 245 worse than the average processor?

Show more

Hide

Narrower instruction support
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
67.8% slower Blender rendering
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (106.7 vs 331.88). The average processor needs 331.88 for the Blender BMW27 test.
No multithreading support
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
1 fewer threads per core
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has fewer threads per core than the average processor (1 vs 2). The average processor offers 2 threads per core.
89.1% higher boost power
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (121 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
44.4% higher base power
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
No configurable TDP
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
5 °C higher CPU temperature
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
44.4% higher TDP
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
67.8% slower Blender rendering
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (106.7 vs 331.88). The average processor needs 331.88 for the Blender BMW27 test.
What it is: A Blender render result based on the BMW27 scene, used to show how quickly the processor can finish a heavy 3D rendering task.
When it matters: When rendering speed matters for 3D work, content creation, or other workloads that behave like long multi-core renders.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: >290
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (106.7 vs 331.88). The average processor needs 331.88 for the Blender BMW27 test.106.7 vs 331.88
Narrower instruction support
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
What it is: The supported CPU instruction sets and extensions.
When it matters: When you run software that depends on specific CPU instructions.
Importance: MEDIUM
Intel Core Ultra 5245 supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
No multithreading support
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
What it is: Lets each physical core run more than one thread at the same time, such as with Hyper-Threading or SMT.
When it matters: When multitasking, rendering, compiling, virtualization, or other thread-heavy work benefits from more total processing threads.
Importance: HIGH
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support multithreading, the average processor does.
89.1% higher boost power
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (121 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
What it is: The short-term boost power limit the processor may draw under heavier turbo loads.
When it matters: When you size cooling and power delivery for peak turbo behavior.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: <50 W
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher boost power draw than the average processor (121 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.121 W vs 64 W
44.4% higher base power
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
What it is: The sustained power target used for longer CPU loads.
When it matters: When you choose cooling and power delivery for sustained workloads.
Importance: MEDIUM
Good value: <30 W
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher base power draw than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.65 W vs 45 W
No configurable TDP
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
What it is: Allows the processor to run in alternate power modes instead of being fixed to one default TDP target.
When it matters: When you want more control over heat, noise, and power draw in compact systems, quieter builds, or thermally limited machines.
Importance: LOW
Intel Core Ultra 5245 does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does.
5 °C higher CPU temperature
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
What it is: The reported operating temperature of the processor.
When it matters: When you monitor thermals, cooling, or system stability.
Importance: LOW
Good value: <100 °C
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher CPU temperature than the average processor (105 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.105 °C vs 100 °C
44.4% higher TDP
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
What it is: The rated thermal design power, which gives a general idea of cooling and power needs.
When it matters: When you choose a cooler or build in a tighter case.
Importance: HIGH
Good value: <30 W
Intel Core Ultra 5245 has a higher TDP than the average processor (65 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.65 W vs 45 W

Power & Thermal

Graphic comparison of Intel Core Ultra 5 245 and other processors

Attribute category

Attribute

No results found

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core Ultra 5 245?

Significantly improved energy efficiency compared to the previous 14th Gen Core i5-14600K
Operates at much lower temperatures, making it easier to cool in compact or silent builds
Strong performance in multi-threaded productivity and creative workloads like Blender and Handbrake
Updated integrated GPU (based on Alchemist architecture) offers roughly double the performance of prior generations
Modern platform features including native support for DDR5-6400, PCIe 5.0, and integrated Thunderbolt 4/5
Includes a dedicated NPU (Neural Processing Unit) for accelerating AI-based tasks

What customers dislike about Intel Core Ultra 5 245?

Disappointing gaming performance that often fails to beat its predecessor, the i5-14600K
Poor value for gamers compared to AMD's Ryzen 5 9600X or older Intel 14th Gen chips
High total cost of entry due to the requirement for new LGA 1851 motherboards and Z890 chipsets
Removal of Hyper-Threading can lead to performance regressions in specific single-thread or latency-sensitive apps
Inconsistent performance across different software titles, sometimes lagging behind much older CPUs in gaming
High memory latency compared to previous monolithic architectures

Expert reviews

pcunboxing.com

26/01/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, 235, 225: How to Choose? Processor Temperature and Power Consumption Tests Would you like to compare the gaming performance o...

The PCUnboxing review of Intel’s Arrow Lake-S lineup (Core Ultra 5 245K, 235, 225) highlights a substantial 63.1% multi-core performance advantage for the 245K over the 225, while noting similar single-core capabilities across the range. Pros include impressive energy efficiency, with max loads around 154W allowing for easier cooling, alongside strong productivity performance in video/photo editing. Conversely, the review identifies mixed gaming results, with the 245K sometimes trailing older Intel and AMD chips, high upgrade costs due to new LGA1851 motherboards, and a lack of Hyper-Threading.

wepc.com

18/12/2024

Summary of the review

Core Ultra 5 245K review: not everything we hoped it would be - WePC

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, based on the Arrow Lake platform, adopts a 14-core, non-hyperthreaded design designed to significantly improve power efficiency and thermal management. While offering a notable, cooler-running alternative for small-form-factor builds, the chip requires a new, costly LGA 1851 motherboard. Productivity performance is strong, with the CPU showcasing competitive multi-core results in synthetic benchmarks and incorporating an NPU for AI tasks. However, gaming performance is considered underwhelming, often failing to outpace the previous generation or AMD alternatives, leading to a mixed value proposition. The 245K stands out for its high efficiency and lower operating temperatures but struggles with a lack of significant gaming improvements over its predecessor. Due to the requirement of an expensive new Z890 platform and underwhelming gaming, the processor is recommended primarily for users who prioritize efficiency over gaming, with others advised to wait for price drops.

tweaktown.com

28/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Processor Review - Team Blue Has Seen Better Days

The TweakTown review characterizes the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K as a "transitional" processor that struggles to justify itself due to lackluster gaming performance, despite marking a shift to the new LGA 1851 socket. While offering improved efficiency and lower cooling requirements over 14th Gen chips, it frequently trails competitors in gaming. The review suggests better value lies elsewhere, as the chip requires a new Z890 motherboard and does not offer a significant performance leap. Key pros highlighted by TweakTown include impressive performance-per-watt, enhanced power efficiency, and a significantly improved integrated GPU, which saw up to 100% gains. The 245K maintains solid, competitive multi-threading performance, particularly in content creation workloads like Blender. Cons focus heavily on disappointing gaming results, often underperforming against the older i5-14600K. The review also cites the lack of Hyper-Threading and a lackluster NPU that misses the 40 TOPS requirement for AI certification as drawbacks. For the full, detailed review, visit TweakTown.

gamersnexus.net

04/11/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K CPU Review & Benchmarks vs 5700X3D, 13700K & More

Gamers Nexus reviews the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, highlighting a significant shift toward power efficiency at the cost of gaming performance compared to predecessors and AMD alternatives. The 14-thread CPU, which drops Hyper-Threading, shows notable gains in efficiency-focused workloads, such as 7-Zip compression and Baldur’s Gate 3, while running cooler than the 14600K. However, the chip frequently regresses in gaming, losing to the AMD 5700X3D and 9700X, and offers only mixed results in production, leading to a conclusion that it is not competitive due to high platform costs.

forbes.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: Best New Mid-Range Processor - Forbes

a little longer The Forbes review of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K highlights a mid-range processor that excels in efficiency and multi-threaded productivity tasks, such as video editing and rendering, while offering significantly improved power consumption and lower operating temperatures compared to previous 14th Gen models. However, the processor shows inconsistent gaming performance, with, in some cases, lower frame rates in titles like Cyberpunk 2077 and Counter-Strike 2 due to architectural changes. Furthermore, the requirement for a new LGA 1851 socket, Z890 motherboard, and DDR5 memory makes it a costly platform upgrade, limiting its appeal to productivity-focused users rather than gamers.

techspot.com

04/11/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: Why So Slow for Gaming?

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, a 14-core "Arrow Lake" processor, delivers strong multi-core productivity performance, showing a 9% improvement in Cinebench 2024 over its predecessor, though it lags behind in specific tasks like 7-Zip compression. While the new architecture offers superior power efficiency and lower operating temperatures, gaming performance is underwhelming, with the chip averaging 8% slower than the i5-14600K. Ultimately, due to poor gaming performance, high platform entry costs for new LGA 1851 motherboards, and a lack of DDR4 support, it is hard to recommend over competitors.

pcmag.com

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review - PCMag

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, based on the new "Arrow Lake" architecture, shifts Intel's mid-range strategy towards efficiency and thermal management over raw speed gains, utilizing 14 cores without Hyper-Threading. It boasts excellent power efficiency and stays cool, but gaming performance is a significant downside, often lagging behind its predecessor and AMD counterparts. While suitable for compact, productivity-focused builds, the high cost of the required new Z890 platform makes it a difficult recommendation for gamers.

ign.com

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review - IGN

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, reviewed by IGN, prioritizes improved power efficiency and lower operating temperatures over significant gaming performance gains, often trailing the older Core i5-14600K in frame rates. While marking a design shift, the chip struggles to justify its position in the competitive mid-range market, particularly for gamers. Conversely, the processor demonstrates strong performance in productivity and creative applications like Blender, utilizing its 14-core architecture effectively. However, IGN notes that the mandatory upgrade to the LGA 1851 socket and Z890 motherboards increases the total platform cost, making it a less attractive option for budget-conscious users compared to existing alternatives. Key pros highlighted include excellent energy efficiency, lower thermals (77∘C77 raised to the composed with power C77∘C peaks), and robust multi-threaded capabilities. The primary cons are underwhelming gaming performance that lags behind AMD's Ryzen 5 9600X and last-gen Intel parts, alongside the high cost of entry. For most, upgrading from 14th-gen hardware is not recommended by IGN.

kitguru.net

12/06/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 is Pointless – Here's Why | KitGuru

Leo Waldock’s review for KitGuru argues the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is a "pointless" market offering, largely because the superior Core Ultra 7 265K is frequently discounted to a similar price point. While the processor provides stable, efficient performance and good undervolting headroom for enthusiasts, it suffers from a disappointing, underwhelming gaming experience that often fails to beat older, cheaper alternatives. Additionally, the LGA1851 platform is described as having a limited, "dead" upgrade path and requires expensive memory to reach peak performance, leading to the conclusion that buyers should select the Ultra 7 instead. Copy

me.pcmag.com

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K - Review 2024 - PCMag Middle East

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K ("Arrow Lake") shifts focus to efficiency, utilizing a 3nm chiplet design with 14 cores and no Hyper-Threading, resulting in significantly lower power draw and temperatures (approx. 68°C) compared to previous generations. Key benefits include improved multi-threaded performance in specific tasks, native DDR5-6400 support, and a dedicated NPU for AI. However, the chip faces drawbacks in gaming, consistently failing to outperform the Core i5-14600K and often lagging by up to 17% in testing, according to the review. Despite strong multi-core performance, single-core speeds sometimes trail behind AMD’s Ryzen 5 9600X and 9700X. Due to the high cost of the new LGA1851 platform and disappointing gaming performance, the review finds the 245K hard to recommend over discounted 14th Gen chips or competitor options. For the full, detailed review, visit PCMag Middle East. Copy

au.pcmag.com

26/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K - Review 2024 - PCMag Australia

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K introduces the "Arrow Lake" architecture, prioritizing improved thermals and energy efficiency over raw performance gains. Featuring 14 cores (6 P-cores, 8 E-cores) on the new LGA 1851 socket, the processor boasts significantly lower power consumption and runs cooler than its 14th-generation predecessors. While efficient, the 245K delivers mixed performance, with synthetic benchmarks showing inconsistent, sometimes lower results compared to the Core i5-14600K. Gaming performance is noted as subpar, as the chip frequently underperforms against the previous-generation 14600K in 3D titles. The review finds the 245K hard to recommend due to the requirement for a new, costly Z890 motherboard and lack of a significant gaming upgrade. Ultimately, it is considered a less compelling option for gaming than both AMD alternatives and Intel's own older hardware. Copy

uk.pcmag.com

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K - Review 2024 - PCMag UK

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K introduces a chiplet-based architecture using TSMC's 3nm process, featuring 14 cores and 14 threads (dropping Hyper-Threading). It demonstrates impressive efficiency improvements over the i5-14600K, running significantly cooler (maximum 68°C) and consuming roughly 26% less power under load. While the 245K offers strong multi-threaded performance in productivity tasks like HandBrake, it struggles in gaming, failing to beat the previous generation in tests. The CPU often falls behind the older i5-14600K by up to 17% in gaming scenarios, making it a disappointing option for gaming-focused builds. PCMag UKUltimately, the chip is hard to recommend due to its subpar gaming performance and the required, expensive Z890 LGA1851 motherboard, despite excellent thermals and strong productivity capability. For better value, PCMag suggests the Core i5-14600K or AMD's Ryzen 5 9600X/Ryzen 7 9700X.

igorslab.de

16/06/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285, Core Ultra 7 265K, Core Ultra 5 245K and 235 re-tested", "Intel Core Ultra 9 285, 7 265K, 5 245K and 235: Follow-up review

Igor Wallossek's re-test shows that BIOS, driver, and Windows 11 updates have significantly matured the Intel Core Ultra 200 series, resulting in better frame time consistency and reduced stutters. The Core Ultra 9 285K now outperforms the 14900K in workstation tasks while offering superior energy efficiency, particularly in multi-threaded scenarios. igor´ Key pros include excellent efficiency—with the 285K leading at approximately 1.19 frames per watt—and strong professional application performance in tools like Blender. However, cons persist, such as the 285K struggling to consistently beat AMD’s X3D chips in gaming, a notable performance gap between the 285K and 265K, and high platform entry costs. Overall, the re-test highlights that Intel has successfully addressed initial launch issues regarding scheduling, making the processors, including the budget-friendly Core Ultra 5 235, highly competitive in efficiency. igor´

hardwaredealz.com

01/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K vs. Intel Core Ultra 7 265K Comparison

The Intel Core Ultra 7 265K and 5 245K, compared by HardwareDealz, both utilize the new LGA 1851 socket, with the 265K offering superior multi-core performance (20 cores, 5.5 GHz) for demanding tasks, though it requires higher power (up to 250W) and cooling. Conversely, the 14-core Ultra 5 245K is a more power-efficient (160W) option, providing exceptional value for gaming with performance within 5-10% of the 265K. While the 265K shines in productivity, both face stiff competition from AMD in gaming efficiency. For the full comparison, visit HardwareDealz. Copy

hardwarecooking.fr

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: A good CPU after all

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K introduces a chiplet-based "Arrow Lake" design, shifting focus toward superior energy efficiency and thermal management over raw speed. While offering strong productivity performance with a 7-11% IPC lead in creative tasks, it drops Hyper-Threading and often lags in gaming due to higher memory latency. Key advantages include significantly lower power consumption and cooler operation, whereas drawbacks involve higher costs for new Z890 motherboards. For more details, visit Hardware Cooking.

lesnumeriques.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: Balancing Performance and Efficiency

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (Arrow Lake) shifts focus toward energy efficiency and improved application performance, offering roughly 15% faster rendering and encoding speeds compared to the i5-14600K while running cooler. It features 6 Performance cores and 8 Efficient cores (14 threads) without Hyper-Threading, establishing itself as an efficient, robust option for content creation. Gaming performance, however, is mixed and slightly behind the previous generation, failing to deliver a significant FPS increase, while the new LGA 1851 socket (Z890) results in high platform costs. As a "transitional" chip, it succeeds in solving the high-power consumption issues of its predecessors but falls short as a gaming upgrade. Pros include excellent power efficiency, lower operating temperatures, and strong productivity performance, whereas cons are underwhelming gaming results and a required motherboard upgrade.

lesnumeriques.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF Review

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF (Arrow Lake) brings a significant architectural shift with 14 cores, abandoning hyper-threading to focus on improved instructions-per-clock (IPC) and efficiency over pure raw frequency. As noted in the review, this mid-range CPU excels in productivity, delivering superior multi-core performance compared to previous generations and competitors, all while maintaining lower power consumption and temperatures. However, the processor falls short in gaming, often underperforming against the older i5-14600K and AMD counterparts, coupled with a high platform entry cost requiring a new Z890 motherboard and DDR5 RAM. Copy

pausehardware.com

03/11/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: The Versatile Mid-Range Choice

The Pause Hardware review of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K highlights a major architectural shift to the 3nm "Arrow Lake" tile-based design, featuring 14 cores (6 P-cores, 8 E-cores) and the elimination of Hyper-Threading. The processor demonstrates superior power efficiency and remarkably low operating temperatures compared to the previous 14th-gen lineup, reducing the need for high-end cooling solutions. Key benefits include solid multi-threaded productivity performance, an improved Xe-LPG integrated GPU, and a new dedicated NPU for AI workloads. However, the analysis notes a regression in gaming performance, where the chip often underperforms compared to the 14th-gen predecessor and AMD rivals. Drawbacks are centered on underwhelming gaming frame rates due to the lack of Hyper-Threading, along with the high platform cost of requiring a new LGA 1851 motherboard and DDR5 memory. The review concludes that while it excels in efficiency, it offers less value for pure gaming, making it a tailored choice for content creators and those prioritizing lower power consumption.

hardwareand.co

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Core Ultra 5 245K / 7 265K / 9 285K Review: Does Arrow Lake mark Intel's return to the top?

The Hardware & Co review of Intel’s Arrow Lake architecture, specifically the Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 5 245K, highlights a shift toward efficiency over raw gaming performance. Significant improvements in power consumption and thermal management allow the 285K to run 12-20°C cooler than the i9-14900K, making them competitive in multi-threaded productivity tasks, rendering, and content creation. However, the processors underperform in gaming compared to the 14th Gen and AMD’s X3D series, and the move to the LGA 1851 socket requires a costly Z890 motherboard upgrade, resulting in a challenging value proposition for gamers. Pros include excellent power efficiency, reduced operating temperatures, strong productivity performance, and the inclusion of a dedicated NPU. Cons center on disappointing gaming performance, inconsistent single-core results due to the lack of Hyper-Threading, and the mandatory, expensive platform upgrade. Copy

notebookcheck.biz

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: The Perfect Balance of Power and Efficiency

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, based on the new Arrow Lake architecture with 14 cores (6 E) and a 5.2 GHz boost, represents a shift toward improved efficiency, offering roughly 37% to 38% lower power consumption than the i5-14600K in certain tests. While multi-core productivity in Cinebench and Premiere Pro sees a 9-11% performance boost over the previous generation, gaming performance is a significant downside, with the chip averaging 8% slower and falling up to 17% behind in titles like Cyberpunk 2077. Key pros include excellent power efficiency, lower operating temperatures, a dedicated AI NPU, and strong productivity, while cons center on disappointing gaming results, high memory latency, and the requirement for a new LGA 1851 socket motherboard. Copy

profesionalreview.com

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review (Full Analysis)

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, based on the Arrow Lake architecture, features 14 cores (6 E) and 14 threads, prioritizing significantly improved energy efficiency and thermal management over previous generations. It delivers competitive multi-threaded performance for productivity, offering strong results in content creation applications like Blender. Pros include lower operating temperatures and faster integrated graphics, while a significant con is the performance regression in gaming, where it often falls behind the Core i5-14600K. Another drawback is the platform cost, as it requires a new LGA 1851 motherboard and DDR5 memory.

rpp.pe

10/02/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: Is this mid-range processor worth it?

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K introduces the Arrow Lake architecture and LGA 1851 socket, featuring 14 cores (6 E) without Hyper-Threading, aimed at productivity over raw gaming performance. Key advantages include significantly improved power efficiency and thermals—peaking around 68°C—along with strong multi-core performance in productivity tasks and upgraded Xe-LPG graphics. However, the chip suffers from disappointing gaming performance, with, in some cases, lower frame rates than the previous generation, compounded by the high cost of new Z890 motherboards and DDR5 memory.

gameit.es

04/12/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: The Best Mid-Range Processor

The GameIt review of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K highlights a balanced, mid-range CPU that prioritizes high power efficiency and improved thermal management over raw, previous-generation gaming performance. Utilizing a 14-core, non-hyper-threaded architecture, the processor runs significantly cooler than its predecessors, frequently outperforming in productive workloads like Blender and Premiere Pro while integrating a new AI-focused NPU. Despite strong productivity gains, the chip faces criticisms for stagnant gaming performance compared to the 14600K and the requirement for a new, costly LGA 1851 motherboard.

geeknetic.es

24 de Octubre, 2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: Benchmarks and Performance Analysis

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, a 14-core (6 E) Arrow Lake-S processor, shifts focus from raw performance to superior energy efficiency and lower operating temperatures, although it lacks Hyper-Threading. While delivering strong productivity performance and supporting modern technologies like Thunderbolt 4 and high-speed DDR5, the chip often underperforms compared to the Core i5-14600K in gaming. Due to gaming performance shortcomings and the added cost of a new LGA1851 motherboard, the 245K is difficult to recommend for pure gaming, despite its improvements in efficiency and content creation. Copy

elchapuzasinformatico.com

24 de Octubre, 2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review

The El Chapuzas Informático review describes the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K as a "transitional" processor that shifts to a 14-core tile-based design, eliminating Hyper-Threading for enhanced efficiency. While offering competitive productivity performance, it struggles to surpass the previous-generation i5-14600K, often delivering identical or slightly lower performance in various benchmarks. Key advantages include superior energy efficiency and reduced power consumption, drawing approximately 20W less than its predecessor under load. Furthermore, the platform brings modernization with the LGA1851 socket, PCIe 5.0 support, and an integrated NPU, though the immediate desktop benefits of the NPU are minimal. Conversely, gaming performance is deemed disappointing, with the processor failing to beat older Intel chips and falling significantly behind AMD's X3D series. Despite lower power usage, operating temperatures remain high, and the high launch price paired with the mandatory Z890 motherboard makes the chip a poor value proposition against current market alternatives.

hardzone.es

24 de Octubre, 2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Core Ultra 5 245K Review

The HardZone review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K and Ultra 5 245K highlights a strategic shift focusing on efficiency, with the 285K (24 cores) removing hyperthreading for drastically lower temperatures—peaking at 61°C—and better thermal management compared to the 14900K. While the chips excel in productivity, achieving strong multi-threaded gains in Cinebench and Blender, they show disappointing gaming performance with inconsistent FPS and no meaningful improvements over previous generations. Key pros include exceptional power efficiency, lower operational temperatures, and an integrated NPU, while cons center on high costs due to the new LGA 1851 socket, lack of hyperthreading, and poor gaming results. Copy

muycomputer.com

24 de Octubre, 2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K Review: Making a Strong Impression in the Mid-Range

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K introduces the "Arrow Lake" architecture and LGA 1851 socket, featuring 14 cores (6 E) and focusing on high IPC and efficiency over Hyper-Threading. It delivers strong productivity performance, often rivaling higher-tier previous-gen chips. Key advantages include significantly improved thermal management, lower power consumption, a dedicated NPU, and superior integrated graphics, alongside native support for faster DDR5 and more PCIe 5.0 lanes. However, gaming performance is inconsistent compared to the i5-14600K or AMD alternatives, and the requirement for new Z890 motherboards increases the total platform cost, making it less attractive for pure gaming builds. Copy

hwlegend.tech

03/01/2025

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K – How does this CPU perform two months after launch?

Two months post-launch, the HWLegend review of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K (14 cores/14 threads, no Hyper-Threading) indicates that while the "Arrow Lake" architecture improves efficiency, the CPU frequently struggles to outperform the Core i5-14600K or AMD competitors in productivity and gaming. The chip shines in productivity, offering strong multi-threaded performance in Blender and Cinebench 2024, alongside significant power efficiency and cooler operating temperatures (68-74°C) compared to 14th Gen chips. However, gaming performance is inconsistent, showing 8-17% regression in some titles compared to the 14600K due to higher latency, compounded by the high cost of the required LGA 1851 platform.

multiplayer.it

15/11/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K review: the mid-range CPU with hit-or-miss performance

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, reviewed by Multiplayer.it, is a transitional "Arrow Lake" CPU prioritizing efficiency over raw gaming performance. Built on the new LGA 1851 socket, the 14-core/14-thread chip boasts excellent thermals (peaking at 77°C) and consumes roughly 26% less power than its 14th Gen predecessor, the i5-14600K. The CPU delivers strong productivity performance, outperforming competitors like the Ryzen 5 9600X and 7 9700X in multi-threaded tasks (Cinebench, Blender). Additionally, the integrated GPU (Xe-LPG) provides up to 100% better performance than previous Intel UHD graphics. However, the review cites "fluctuating" performance and lower gaming framerates compared to the previous generation. High total ownership costs, due to new Z890 motherboards and DDR5, make it a difficult recommendation for gamers.

tomshw.it

25/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K: The new mid-range benchmark?

The Tom's Hardware Italy review highlights the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K as a new, highly efficient, and cool-running mid-range contender, boasting excellent productivity performance due to the modular Arrow Lake architecture. While it excels in multi-threaded tasks, often rivaling or beating its predecessors in rendering workloads, the chip suffers from significant gaming performance regression, sometimes trailing behind older 14th-generation parts. Ultimately, the review identifies the 245K as a superior choice for content creation and workstations, rather than purely for gaming, further burdened by the high platform costs of the new LGA 1851 motherboard requirements. Copy

tweakers.net

24/10/2024

Summary of the review

Intel Core Ultra 5 245K, 7 265K, and 9 285K Review - Tweakers

The Intel Core Ultra 200S series (9 285K, 7 265K, 5 245K) signals a major architectural shift to Arrow Lake and the LGA1851 socket, with Tweakers highlighting a primary pro of significantly improved energy efficiency and lower power consumption compared to the 14th-gen predecessors. While productivity performance is strong, with the 9 285K excelling in multi-threaded tasks, the 5 245K specifically is noted for superior efficiency against rivals, alongside improved iGPU performance. Conversely, a major con identified in the review is the regression in gaming performance, with the new chips frequently underperforming the older i9-14900K due to the removal of Hyper-Threading and increased memory latency. The reliance on a new Z890 motherboard and lack of DDR4 support also raises the overall cost of ownership. Overall, Tweakers describes the series as a "transitional product" that, despite its efficiency gains and new NPU, is hard to recommend for pure gaming enthusiasts over existing, more mature alternatives. For the full, detailed review, visit Tweakers. Copy

Video reviews

Best alternatives

AMD Ryzen 9 7900X

Processors

Intel Core Ultra 7 265

Processors

AMD Ryzen 7 9700X

Processors

AMD Ryzen 9 7900

Processors

AMD Ryzen 9 5950X

Processors

Intel Core Ultra 7 265KF

Processors

Intel Core i5 14500

Processors

Intel Core i5 14600T

Processors

Intel Core i7 12700

Processors

Intel Core i5 13500

Processors

Intel Core i9 12900K

Processors

AMD Ryzen 7 7700X

Processors

Compare Intel Core Ultra 5 245 with other processors

Compare