Core Ultra 5 245KF
EPYC 7402P
Core Ultra 5 245KF vs EPYC 7402P 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 245KF vs EPYC 7402P 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 245KF vs EPYC 7402P: 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 245KF
2024Why buy it
- ✅Better for gaming: +26.6% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ✅Costs $986 less on MSRP ($294 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 332.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 147.7 vs 34.2 PassMark/$ ($294 MSRP vs $1,280 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 125W instead of 180W, a 55W reduction.
- ✅Newer platform on LGA1851 with DDR5 support instead of SP3 and DDR4.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (43,424 vs 43,759).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (24 MB vs 128 MB).
- ❌Less compelling for workstation-style loads than EPYC 7402P, which brings 24 cores / 48 threads and 128 PCIe lanes.
EPYC 7402P
2019Why buy it
- ✅+0.8% higher PassMark.
- ✅+433.3% larger total L3 cache (128 MB vs 24 MB).
- ✅Better for workstations and heavier parallel workloads: 24 cores / 48 threads, plus 128 PCIe lanes vs 20.
- ✅540% more PCIe lanes (128 vs 20) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
Trade-offs
- ❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 5 245KF across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 34.2 vs 147.7 PassMark/$ ($1,280 MSRP vs $294 MSRP).
- ❌44% higher power demand at 180W vs 125W.
- ❌Older platform position on SP3 with DDR4, while Core Ultra 5 245KF moves to LGA1851 and DDR5.
- ❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 5 245KF can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.
Quick Answers
So, is Core Ultra 5 245KF better than EPYC 7402P?
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 245KF vs EPYC 7402P Technical Specifications
Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.
Core Ultra 5 245KF
The Core Ultra 5 245KF is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 14 cores and 14 threads. Base frequency is 4.2 GHz, with boost up to 5.2 GHz. L3 cache: 24 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 43,424 points. Launch price was $294.
EPYC 7402P
The EPYC 7402P 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 2.8 GHz, with boost up to 3.35 GHz. L3 cache: 128 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 7 nm, 14 nm process technology. Socket: SP3. Thermal design power (TDP): 180 Watt. Memory support: DDR4 Eight-channel. Passmark benchmark score: 43,759 points. Launch price was $1,250.
Processing Power
The Core Ultra 5 245KF packs 14 cores / 14 threads, while the EPYC 7402P offers 24 cores / 48 threads — the EPYC 7402P has 10 more cores. Boost clocks reach 5.2 GHz on the Core Ultra 5 245KF versus 3.35 GHz on the EPYC 7402P — a 43.3% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 5 245KF (base: 4.2 GHz vs 2.8 GHz). The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture (3 nm), while the EPYC 7402P uses Zen 2 (2017−2020) (7 nm, 14 nm). In PassMark, the Core Ultra 5 245KF scores 43,424 against the EPYC 7402P's 43,759 — a 0.8% lead for the EPYC 7402P. L3 cache: 24 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 5 245KF vs 128 MB (total) on the EPYC 7402P.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245KF | EPYC 7402P |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 14 / 14 | 24 / 48+71% |
| Boost Clock | 5.2 GHz+55% | 3.35 GHz |
| Base Clock | 4.2 GHz+50% | 2.8 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 24 MB (total) | 128 MB (total)+433% |
| 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 | 43,424 | 43,759 |
Memory & Platform
The Core Ultra 5 245KF uses the LGA1851 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the EPYC 7402P uses SP3 (PCIe 4.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches 6400 on the Core Ultra 5 245KF versus 3200 on the EPYC 7402P — the Core Ultra 5 245KF supports 100% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The EPYC 7402P supports up to 4096 of RAM compared to 192 — 2033.3% more capacity for professional workloads. Memory channels: 2 (Core Ultra 5 245KF) vs 8 (EPYC 7402P). PCIe lanes: 20 (Core Ultra 5 245KF) vs 128 (EPYC 7402P) — the EPYC 7402P offers 108 more lanes for additional GPUs or NVMe drives. Chipset compatibility: Z890,B860 (Core Ultra 5 245KF) and SP3 (EPYC 7402P).
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245KF | EPYC 7402P |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1851 | SP3 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 5.0+25% | PCIe 4.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | 6400+100% | 3200 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 192 | 4096+2033% |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 8+300% |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 20 | 128+540% |
Advanced Features
Only the Core Ultra 5 245KF has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking — a significant advantage for enthusiasts seeking extra performance. Only the EPYC 7402P supports AVX-512 instructions — important for machine learning and scientific applications. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 5 245KF) vs VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V (EPYC 7402P). The Core Ultra 5 245KF includes integrated graphics (Intel Graphics (4 Xe-cores)), while the EPYC 7402P requires a dedicated GPU. Direct competitor: Core Ultra 5 245KF rivals Ryzen 5 9600X; EPYC 7402P rivals Xeon Gold 6248.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245KF | EPYC 7402P |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | No |
| IGPU Model | Intel Graphics (4 Xe-cores) | None |
| Unlocked | Yes | No |
| AVX-512 | No | Yes |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d, AMD-V |
Value Analysis
At launch, the Core Ultra 5 245KF was priced at $294, while the EPYC 7402P came in at $1280. On launch pricing ($294 vs $1280), Core Ultra 5 245KF was $986 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core Ultra 5 245KF delivers 147.7 pts/$ vs 34.2 pts/$ for the EPYC 7402P — making the Core Ultra 5 245KF the 124.8% better value option.
| Feature | Core Ultra 5 245KF | EPYC 7402P |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $294-77% | $1280 |
| Performance per Dollar | 147.7+332% | 34.2 |
| Release Date | 2024 | 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 245KF and EPYC 7402P
