Ultra 5 245KF vs Celeron D 352

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Celeron D 352
2006
1 core / 1 thread, 86 Watt
0.17
Core Ultra 5 245KF
2024
14 cores / 14 threads, 125 Watt
27.68
+16182%

Core Ultra 5 245KF outperforms Celeron D 352 by a whopping 16182% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking3275176
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Cost-effectiveness evaluationno data82.57
Market segmentDesktop processorDesktop processor
Power efficiency0.1920.96
Architecture codenameCedar Mill (2006)Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
Release dateMay 2006 (18 years ago)24 October 2024 (less than a year ago)
Launch price (MSRP)no data$294

Cost-effectiveness evaluation

Performance per price, higher is better.

no data

Detailed specifications

Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF 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 cores1 (Single-Core)14 (Tetradeca-Core)
Threads114
Base clock speed3.2 GHz4.2 GHz
Boost clock speed3.2 GHz5.2 GHz
L1 cache16 KB112 KB (per core)
L2 cache512 KB3 MB (per core)
L3 cache0 KB24 MB (shared)
Chip lithography65 nm3 nm
Die size109 mm2243 mm2
Maximum core temperature69 °Cno data
Number of transistors125 million17,800 million
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility-no data
VID voltage range1.25V-1.325Vno data

Compatibility

Information on Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF 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 configuration11
SocketPLGA775FCLGA1851
Power consumption (TDP)86 Watt125 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsno dataIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2
AES-NI-+
AVX-+
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)-+
Speed Shiftno data+
Turbo Boost Technology-2.0
Hyper-Threading Technology-no data
TSX-+
Idle States-+
Thermal Monitoring-+
Demand Based Switching-no data
PAE32 Bitno data
FSB parity-no data
Deep Learning Boost-+
Supported AI Software Frameworks-OpenVINO™, WindowsML, DirectML, ONNX RT, WebNN

Security technologies

Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT-+
EDB++
Secure Keyno data+
OS Guardno data+

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF are enumerated here.

VT-dno data+
VT-x-+
EPTno data+

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR1, DDR2, DDR3DDR5-6400
Maximum memory sizeno data192 GB
Max memory channelsno data2

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardno dataN/A

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF.

PCIe versionno data5.0 and 4.0
PCI Express lanesno data20

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.

Celeron D 352 0.17
Ultra 5 245KF 27.68
+16182%

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.

Celeron D 352 274
Ultra 5 245KF 43973
+15949%

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.17 27.68
Physical cores 1 14
Threads 1 14
Chip lithography 65 nm 3 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 86 Watt 125 Watt

Celeron D 352 has 45.3% lower power consumption.

Ultra 5 245KF, on the other hand, has a 16182.4% higher aggregate performance score, 1300% more physical cores and 1300% more threads, and a 2066.7% more advanced lithography process.

The Core Ultra 5 245KF is our recommended choice as it beats the Celeron D 352 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Celeron D 352 and Core Ultra 5 245KF, 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.


Intel Celeron D 352
Celeron D 352
Intel Core Ultra 5 245KF
Core Ultra 5 245KF

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.


2.4 35 votes

Rate Celeron D 352 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
3.3 12 votes

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

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Celeron D 352 or Core Ultra 5 245KF, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.