Ultra 5 245K vs EPYC 7251

VS

Aggregate performance score

EPYC 7251
2017
8 cores / 16 threads, 120 Watt
9.40
Core Ultra 5 245K
2024
14 cores / 14 threads, 125 Watt
27.64
+194%

Core Ultra 5 245K outperforms EPYC 7251 by a whopping 194% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking814175
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluation2.8878.36
Market segmentServerDesktop processor
SeriesAMD EPYCno data
Power efficiency7.3720.82
Architecture codenameNaples (2017−2018)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release date29 June 2017 (7 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)$574$309

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

Ultra 5 245K has 2621% better value for money than EPYC 7251.

Detailed specifications

EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores8 (Octa-Core)14 (Tetradeca-Core)
Threads1614
Base clock speed2.1 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed2.9 GHz5.2 GHz
Bus rateno data159 MHz
Multiplier21no data
L1 cache96K (per core)112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512K (per core)3 MB (per core)
L3 cache32 MB (shared)24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography14 nm3 nm
Die size192 mm2243 mm2
Number of transistors4,800 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
Unlocked multiplier++

Compatibility

Information on EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration2 (Multiprocessor)1
SocketTR41851
Power consumption (TDP)120 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

AES-NI++
AVX++
vProno data+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)no data+
TSX-+
SIPP-+

Security technologies

EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXTno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K are enumerated here.

AMD-V+-
VT-dno data+
VT-xno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR4 Eight-channelDDR5
Maximum memory size2 TiBno data
Max memory channels8no data
Maximum memory bandwidth153.652 GB/sno data
ECC memory support+-

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataArc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K.

PCIe version3.05.0
PCI Express lanes12820

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

EPYC 7251 9.40
Ultra 5 245K 27.64
+194%

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

EPYC 7251 14935
Ultra 5 245K 43908
+194%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 9.40 27.64
Recency 29 June 2017 24 October 2024
Physical cores 8 14
Threads 16 14
Chip lithography 14 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 120 Watt 125 Watt

EPYC 7251 has 14.3% more threads, and 4.2% lower power consumption.

Ultra 5 245K, on the other hand, has a 194% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 75% more physical cores, and a 366.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 5 245K is our recommended choice as it beats the EPYC 7251 in performance tests.

Be aware that EPYC 7251 is a server/workstation processor while Core Ultra 5 245K is a desktop one.


Should you still have questions on choice between EPYC 7251 and Core Ultra 5 245K, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


AMD EPYC 7251
EPYC 7251
Intel Core Ultra 5 245K
Core Ultra 5 245K

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


1.2 121 vote

Rate EPYC 7251 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 21 vote

Rate Core Ultra 5 245K on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about EPYC 7251 or Core Ultra 5 245K, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.