Intel Core Ultra 5 245K review: Arrow Lake sucks at gaming
When you purchase through links on our website, we may earn an affiliate commission.
Intel Core Ultra 5 245K
No value for money.
3.5
Pros
- Array
- Array
Cons
- Array
- Array
Don't feel like reading? Listen to this podcast featuring our detailed review of the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K processor.
The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K is one of Intel’s latest processors in the “Arrow Lake” family, hitting the market with a focus on balanced performance for a mid-range audience. At around $309, it’s geared toward users who need a reliable, moderately powerful chip without stretching their budget. Positioned as a solid option for gamers and multitaskers, the Core Ultra 5 245K delivers on efficiency and capability, though there are some trade-offs—particularly if gaming is a top priority. Let’s dive into what makes this CPU unique, and why it might (or might not) be worth buying.
Specifications and Architecture
Arrow Lake introduces a chiplet architecture, which means the processor is divided into smaller components (or tiles) that are manufactured separately and later combined. This design has been popular with AMD’s recent chips and is known for allowing more flexibility in performance tuning and improved manufacturing yields. Intel’s move to this design helps manage thermal output better while enhancing production efficiency and keeping costs lower for mid-range users.
The Core Ultra 5 245K is built on a cutting-edge 3nm manufacturing process using TSMC’s N3B node, exclusively for the CPU’s compute tile. This 3nm node provides better transistor density, which translates to improved power efficiency and performance per watt. Supporting this core technology is Intel’s hybrid architecture, which combines performance (P-cores) and efficiency (E-cores) to handle different tasks simultaneously. The 245K comes with 6 P-cores and 8 E-cores, a setup that makes it suitable for multitasking, content creation, and light-to-moderate gaming
The Intel Core Ultra 245K features the new LGA-1851 socket, which means you will have to buy a new compatible motherboard for installation. It supports DDR5-6400 memory and it is compatible with PCIe Gen 5. The new socket supports modern connectivity standards, including USB 4 and Thunderbolt, making it more adaptable for future peripherals and devices. These enhancements give the Core Ultra 5 245K a leg up in forward compatibility, even though the platform is relatively new and may require BIOS updates for optimal stability.
| Specification | Details |
|---|---|
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-S |
| Core Configuration | 6 Performance + 8 Efficiency Cores |
| Threads | 14 threads |
| Base Clock (P-cores) | 4.2 GHz |
| Boost Clock (P-cores) | 5.2 GHz |
| Foundry | TSMC |
| Process Size | 3 nm |
| Socket | LGA-1851 |
| Transistors | 17,800 million |
| Integrated Graphics | Arc Xe-2 Graphics 64EU |
| Memory Support | DDR5 |
| PCIe Support | PCIe Gen 5 |
| Cache | 24MB L3 cache |
| AI Acceleration NPU | 13 TOPS |
| TDP | 125 W |
| tJMax | 105°C |
| Release Date | Oct 24th, 2024 |
| Launch Price | $309 |
Test System Specs
For Intel Core Ultra 200S
Motherboard: ASUS ROG Maximus Z890 Hero
RAM: G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200 (except where other RAM is mentioned)
For Intel 13th and 14th Gen
Motherboard: MSI MPG Z790 Carbon Wifi
RAM: G.Skill Trident Z5 RGB DDR5-7200
For AMD Ryen 7000 Series
Motherboard: Gigabyte X670E Aorus Master
RAM: G.Skill Trident Z5 Neo DDR5-6000
For AMD Ryzen 5000 Series
Motherboard: MSI MPG X570S Carbon MAX WiFi
RAM: G.Skill Ripjaws V Series DDR4-3600
All Systems
Graphic Card: ASUS ROG Strix GeForce RTX 4090 OC Edition
Gaming Performance
All games were tested at 1080p resolution. Testing at this resolution allows the CPU’s performance to be accurately assessed without the GPU becoming a limiting factor. By reducing the graphics load, the CPU’s ability to handle game logic, physics, and AI becomes more apparent, making 1080p an ideal resolution for uncovering any CPU bottlenecks and ensuring a clear, direct comparison between processors. During testing, we noticed performance inconsistencies when using Windows 11 version 24H2; the Intel Core Ultra 200S series processors performed noticeably better on version 23H2. Consequently, we tested these (Intel Core Ultra 200S series and Intel’s 13th and 14th generation processors) on Windows 11 version 23H2, while other CPUs were benchmarked on version 24H2.
Let’s dive into the benchmarks to see if the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K can deliver better performance than its predecessor, the i5-14600K.
We see a similar case here with the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K’s gaming performance as we saw with the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K. Both of these processors fall short of their previous-generation counterparts when it comes to gaming. This means that these CPUs are simply a “no” for gamers.
Productivity Applications Performance
Now that gamers have an answer to whether this CPU fits their needs, let’s turn to what the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K offers for content creators.
The Intel Core Ultra 5 245K does perform better in productivity tasks than the i5-14600K, but the improvement isn’t significant enough to make it a standout mid-range CPU for content creation. This situation is similar to the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, which also showed better productivity performance than the i9-14900K, but the gains weren’t substantial enough to consider it a worthy upgrade. Content creators might see some benefits, but it’s not a game-changer for those looking for the best value in mid-range processing power.
Power Consumption and Efficiency
Intel’s main focus with the Core Ultra 200 series has been on efficiency and reducing power draw. So, let’s see how the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K fares in terms of power consumption and efficiency—and whether these improvements make a meaningful impact in real-world use.
The Core Ultra 5 245K does indeed consume less power and is more efficient than its previous-generation counterpart, but it still lags behind AMD processors, which remain significantly more efficient, draw noticeably less power, and also give better performance. Most importantly, the reduction in power draw and increased efficiency alone without any significant improvements in performance simply don’t justify the cost of upgrading to this CPU.
Final Verdict
As we mentioned in our review of the Intel Core Ultra 9 285K, the reduced power draw and increased efficiency will not benefit you unless you’re playing games like Cyberpunk 2077 and The Last of Us as a full-time job for the next 3-5 years. And honestly, if you’re willing to invest heavily in a CPU, efficiency will not be a concern to you if performance is top-notch.
So, here’s the simple answer: if you’re already on an i5-14600K, you shouldn’t be considering an upgrade to the Core Ultra 5 245K because you will need a new motherboard and DDR5 RAM, which adds up to a hefty investment that’s just not worth it. You’d be better off sticking with your current CPU, or if you want a meaningful upgrade, consider the i7-14700K or i9-14900K.
If you’re building a new PC and want the best gaming performance, it’s probably worth waiting until the Ryzen 7 9800X3D launches on November 7th. Alternatively, if you can’t wait, the Ryzen 7 7800X3D is a great option. For top-tier productivity performance, the Ryzen 9 9950X is an ideal pick, or the Ryzen 9 7950X if you’re looking for excellent production value on a more modest budget.
Right now, it’s best to avoid the Intel Core Ultra 5 245K and Core Ultra 9 285K until their prices come down significantly—though that’s not likely anytime soon.
Recommended Products:
 AMD RYZEN 7 7800X3D | |
 AMD RYZEN 9 7950X | |
 AMD RYZEN 9 9950X |
Related Articles: