Core Ultra 5 245
EPYC 7352
Core Ultra 5 245 vs EPYC 7352 Performance Spectrum
About PassMark
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 5 245 vs EPYC 7352 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.
Path of Exile 2
Counter-Strike 2
League of Legends
Valorant
Among Us
Apex Legends
ARC Raiders
Baldur's Gate 3
Call of Duty: Black Ops 6
Core Ultra 5 245 vs EPYC 7352: 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 5 245
2025Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +28.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $1,031 less on MSRP ($319 MSRP vs $1,350 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 321.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 125.9 vs 29.9 PassMark/$ ($319 MSRP vs $1,350 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 65W instead of 155W, a 90W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (40,165 vs 40,370).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 32 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7352, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7352
2019Why buy it
- ✅+0.5% higher PassMark.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (32 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 245 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 29.9 vs 125.9 PassMark/$ ($1,350 MSRP vs $319 MSRP).
- ❌138.5% higher power demand at 155W vs 65W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 245 moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 245 can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 5 245 better than EPYC 7352?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Core Ultra 5 245 vs EPYC 7352 Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Core Ultra 5 245
The Core Ultra 5 245 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 7 January 2025 (less than a year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 14 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 5.1 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 65 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 40,165 points. Launch price was $270.
EPYC 7352
The EPYC 7352 is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 7 August 2019 (6 years ago). It is based on the Zen 2 (2017−2020) architecture. It features 24 cores and 48 threads. Base frequency is 2.3 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 32 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 155 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 40,370 points. Launch price was $1,350.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 5 245 packs 14 cores / 14 threads, while the EPYC 7352 offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7352 has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.1 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 245 versus 3.2 GHz on the EPYC 7352 — a 45.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 245 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 2.3 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 245 uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 7352 uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 245 scores 40,165 against the EPYC 7352's 40,370 — a 0.5% lead for the EPYC 7352. L3 cache: 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 245 vs 32 MB (total) on the EPYC 7352.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245 | EPYC 7352 |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 14 / 14 | 24 / 48+71% |
| Boost Clock | 5.1 GHz+59% | 3.2 GHz |
| Base Clock | 3.5 GHz+52% | 2.3 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB (total) | 32 MB (total)+33% |
| L2 Cache | 3 MB (per core)+500% | 512 kB (per core) |
| Process | 3 nm-57% | 7 nm, 14 nm |
| Architecture | Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) | Zen 2 (2017−2020) |
| PassMark | 40,165 | 40,370 |
| Cinebench R23 Multi | — | 32,000 |
| Geekbench 6 Single | — | 1,112 |
| Geekbench 6 Multi | — | 7,276 |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 5 245 uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7352 uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the Core Ultra 5 245 versus DDR4-3200 on the EPYC 7352 — the Core Ultra 5 245 supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7352 supports up to 4096 GB of RAM compared to 256 GB — 1500% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 245) vs 8 (EPYC 7352). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 5 245) vs 128 (EPYC 7352) — the EPYC 7352 offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 5 245) and SP3,Rome (EPYC 7352).
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245 | EPYC 7352 |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1851 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 6400+100% | DDR4-3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 256 GB | 4096 GB+1500% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 245) vs AMD-V, SEV (EPYC 7352). The Core Ultra 5 245 includes integrated graphics (Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics), while the EPYC 7352 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: EPYC 7352 targets High-density Computing / Server. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 245 rivals Ryzen 5 9600X; EPYC 7352 rivals Xeon Gold 6242.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245 | EPYC 7352 |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel Arc Xe-LPG Graphics | — |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | AMD-V, SEV |
| Target Use | — | High-density Computing / Server |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core Ultra 5 245 was priced at $319, while the EPYC 7352 came in at $1350. On launch pricing ($319 vs $1350), Core Ultra 5 245 was $1031 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 5 245 delivers 125.9 pts/$ vs 29.9 pts/$ for the EPYC 7352 — making the Core Ultra 5 245 the 123.2% better value option.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245 | EPYC 7352 |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $319-76% | $1350 |
| Performance per Dollar | 125.9+321% | 29.9 |
| Release Date | 2025 | 2019 |
Affiliate Disclosure
ChipVERSUS is a participant in the Amazon Services LLC Associates Program, an affiliate advertising program designed to provide a means for sites to earn advertising fees by advertising and linking to Amazon.com. We may earn a commission on qualifying purchases made through our links. This comes at no additional cost to you and helps support our work in providing comprehensive PC building guides and tools.
Amazon and the Amazon logo are trademarks of Amazon.com, Inc. or its affiliates.
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.
You May Also Compare
Similar CPU comparisons based on Core Ultra 5 245 and EPYC 7352
