PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Core Ultra 5 225H vs Xeon W-3245M FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core Ultra 5 225H vs Xeon W-3245M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

Core Ultra 5 225H

2025

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +8.0% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅Draws 20W instead of 205W, a 185W reduction.
✅Newer platform on FCBGA2049 with DDR5 support instead of LGA3647 and DDR4.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Intel Arc 130T GPU, while Xeon W-3245M needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower Cinebench R23 multi-core (14,526 vs 18,500).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (18 MB vs 22 MB).
❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than Xeon W-3245M, which brings 16 cores / 32 threads and 64 PCIe lanes.

Xeon W-3245M

2019

Why buy it

✅+27.4% higher Cinebench R23 multi-core.
✅+22.2% larger total L3 cache (22 MB vs 18 MB).
✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 16 cores / 32 threads, plus 64 PCIe lanes vs 28.
✅128.6% more PCIe lanes (64 vs 28) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 225H across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Launch MSRP is still $5,002 MSRP, while Core Ultra 5 225H mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌925% higher power demand at 205W vs 20W.
❌Older platform position on LGA3647 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 225H moves to FCBGA2049 and DDR5.
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 225H can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 5 225H better than Xeon W-3245M?

Not really, because they are built for different jobs. Xeon W-3245M makes more sense for workstation-style multi-core throughput, while Core Ultra 5 225H is the more practical desktop choice for gaming, platform cost, and everyday use.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Xeon W-3245M is the stronger fit. You are getting 27.4% better Cinebench R23 multi-core, backed by 16 cores and 32 threads. It also has the larger cache pool with 22.2% larger total L3 cache (22 MB vs 18 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 5 225H is still the faster CPU overall, but Xeon W-3245M is easier to justify if budget matters more than peak performance. Core Ultra 5 225H comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $5,002 MSRP, and it still gives you a 8.0% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Xeon W-3245M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 27.4% better Cinebench R23 multi-core. Xeon W-3245M is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (5.7 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), which is why it can still make sense for tighter-budget builds on paper.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 5 225H makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2025 vs 2019) and a healthier platform with FCBGA2049 and DDR5 instead of LGA3647. That gives you a healthier platform runway for motherboard, RAM, and later CPU upgrades.

Core Ultra 5 225H vs Xeon W-3245M Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

Core Ultra 5 225H

The Core Ultra 5 225H is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture. It features 14 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 4.3 GHz, with boost up to 4.9 GHz. L3 cache: 18 MB. Built on 5 nm process technology. Socket: FCBGA2049. Thermal design power (TDP): 20 MB + 18 MB. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 28,802 points. Launch price was $385.

Xeon W-3245M

The Xeon W-3245M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 June 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Cascade Lake (2019−2020) architecture. It features 16 cores and 32 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 22 MB. L2 cache: 16 MB. Built on 14 nm process technology. Socket: LGA3647. Thermal design power (TDP): 205 Watt. Memory support: DDR4-2933. Passmark benchmark score: 28,494 points. Launch price was $5,002.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core Ultra 5 225H packs 14 cores / 14 threads, while the Xeon W-3245M offers 16 cores / 32 threads — the Xeon W-3245M has 2 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.9 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 225H versus 4.6 GHz on the Xeon W-3245M — a 6.3% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225H (base: 4.3 GHz vs 3.2 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 225H uses the Arrow Lake-H (2025) architecture (5 nm), while the Xeon W-3245M uses Cascade Lake (2019−2020) (14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 225H scores 28,802 against the Xeon W-3245M's 28,494 — a 1.1% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225H. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 14,526 vs 18,500 (24.1% advantage for the Xeon W-3245M). Geekbench 6 single-core — the metric most relevant to gaming — records 2,678 vs 1,474, a 58% lead for the Core Ultra 5 225H that directly translates to higher frame rates. Multi-core Geekbench: 12,337 vs 11,572 (6.4% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 225H). L3 cache: 18 MB on the Core Ultra 5 225H vs 22 MB on the Xeon W-3245M.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	Xeon W-3245M
Cores / Threads	14 / 14	16 / 32+14%
Boost Clock	4.9 GHz+7%	4.6 GHz
Base Clock	4.3 GHz+34%	3.2 GHz
L3 Cache	18 MB	22 MB+22%
L2 Cache	—	16 MB
Process	5 nm-64%	14 nm
Architecture	Arrow Lake-H (2025)	Cascade Lake (2019−2020)
PassMark	28,802+1%	28,494
Cinebench R23 Multi	14,526	18,500+27%
Geekbench 6 Single	2,678+82%	1,474
Geekbench 6 Multi	12,337+7%	11,572

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core Ultra 5 225H uses the FCBGA2049 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Xeon W-3245M uses LGA3647 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR5-6400 on the Core Ultra 5 225H versus DDR4-2933 on the Xeon W-3245M — the Core Ultra 5 225H supports 118.2% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Xeon W-3245M supports up to 2048 GB of RAM compared to 128 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs 6 (Xeon W-3245M). PCIe lanes: 28 (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs 64 (Xeon W-3245M) — the Xeon W-3245M offers 36 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: WM880,HM870 (Core Ultra 5 225H) and C621 (Xeon W-3245M).

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	Xeon W-3245M
Socket	FCBGA2049	LGA3647
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0+67%	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR5-6400+118%	DDR4-2933
Max RAM Capacity	128 GB	2048 GB+1500%
RAM Channels	2	6+200%
ECC Support	No	Yes
PCIe Lanes	28	64+129%

🔧

Advanced Features

Only the Core Ultra 5 225H has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the Xeon W-3245M supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 225H) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Xeon W-3245M). The Core Ultra 5 225H includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc 130T GPU), while the Xeon W-3245M requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core Ultra 5 225H targets Professional Content Creation Laptop, Xeon W-3245M targets Professional Workstation / Mac Pro. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 225H rivals Ryzen 7 9800H; Xeon W-3245M rivals Xeon Gold 6242.

Feature	Core Ultra 5 225H	Xeon W-3245M
Integrated GPU	Yes	No
IGPU Model	Intel Arc 130T GPU	—
Unlocked	Yes	No
AVX-512	No	Yes
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Professional Content Creation Laptop	Professional Workstation / Mac Pro