Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data delivers an unambiguous outcome: the Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins every single head-to-head comparison against the Intel Core 3 201E. Across 17 benchmark tests, the Core Ultra 5 225T takes all 17 wins, with the Core 3 201E recording zero wins. The margin is not narrow. The average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 5 225T is 30468, while the Core 3 201E averages 19056, placing the Ultra part roughly 60% higher in overall average score. The Core Ultra 5 225T sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 3 201E sits at the 73rd percentile.

The data indicates that the Core 3 201E is positioned for basic desktop workloads where raw throughput is secondary. Its nearest rivals in the database include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with an average score of 19047, the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19039, and the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982. These deltas are minimal, all within 0.4% of the Core 3 201E's average. The Core Ultra 5 225T, by contrast, competes in a higher tier. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-11980HK at 30422, the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS at 30390, and the Intel Core i5-13600H at 30548. The delta between the Core Ultra 5 225T and the i5-13600H is -0.3%, meaning the Core Ultra 5 225T trails that rival by a slim margin in average score.

Selection depends on the workload class. For single-threaded responsiveness, the Core Ultra 5 225T leads by 19.9% in PassMark single-thread tests. For multi-threaded rendering, the lead expands dramatically. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score shows the Core Ultra 5 225T at 21971 versus 12613 for the Core 3 201E, a 42.6% deficit for the latter. The Core 3 201E remains a functional choice for entry-level desktops, but the data does not support any scenario where it outperforms the Core Ultra 5 225T in measured benchmarks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in their underlying design. The Intel Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Arrow Lake-S codename, is part of the Core Ultra Series 2, and is manufactured on a 3 nm process node at TSMC. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm, which explains part of the efficiency and performance gap observed in the benchmarks.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. The Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads, meaning it relies on physical cores without Hyper-Threading. Despite having fewer threads than the core count might suggest, the Core Ultra 5 225T still delivers far higher multi-threaded scores due to its architecture and higher core count.

Cache hierarchies are also distinct. The Core 3 201E provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 225T provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger cache allocation on the Core Ultra 5 225T, especially the 20 MB L3 versus 12 MB, supports its superior performance in cache-sensitive workloads like data compression and encryption.

The transistor count and die size are only recorded for the Core Ultra 5 225T: 17,800 million transistors on a 243 mm² die. The Core 3 201E has a die size of 163 mm², but no transistor count is listed. The Core 3 201E uses the Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 225T uses the Intel Socket 1851. These are physically incompatible sockets, meaning platform choice is a deciding factor before considering performance.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201E ships with UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 225T ships with Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU. No graphics benchmarks are recorded, so the comparison is limited to the naming and architecture. Memory support also differs: the Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 only. ECC memory is supported on the Core 3 201E but not on the Core Ultra 5 225T. PCIe lanes differ, with the Core 3 201E providing 16 CPU-only lanes and the Core Ultra 5 225T providing 20 CPU-only lanes, both Gen 5.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a consistent pattern of the Core Ultra 5 225T winning, but the margins vary by workload. The largest deficit for the Core 3 201E occurs in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 284 versus 57, a 79.9% delta. This is an extreme gap and indicates a major difference in integer-heavy computational throughput. The smallest deficit is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core 3 201E scores 3482 versus 4348, a 19.9% delta. Even in single-threaded performance, which is often the most competitive area for lower-end parts, the Core Ultra 5 225T holds a clear lead.

In Cinebench tests, the deltas are uniform at -42.6% across all six tests. This includes R15 multi-core (1271 versus 2214), R15 single-core (179 versus 312), R20 multi-core (5297 versus 9227), R20 single-core (747 versus 1302), R23 multi-core (12613 versus 21971), and R23 single-core (1780 versus 3101). The consistency of this delta suggests a fixed architectural advantage rather than workload-specific behavior.

PassMark tests show more varied margins. Data compression shows a 29.8% delta (164160 versus 233998). Data encryption shows a 51.2% delta (8931 versus 18289). Extended instructions show a 45.1% delta (11035 versus 20083). Floating point math shows a 59.8% delta (33260 versus 82751). Integer math shows a 26.3% delta (43894 versus 59543). Multi-thread shows a 41.5% delta (14839 versus 25358). Physics shows a 44.4% delta (1141 versus 2053). Random string sorting shows a 38.2% delta (17783 versus 28774).

The data suggests the Core Ultra 5 225T excels most in floating point and prime number calculations, while the Core 3 201E is relatively least disadvantaged in single-threaded and integer math tasks. The encryption gap of 51.2% is notable, likely reflecting the larger L3 cache and newer architecture of the Core Ultra 5 225T.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several key differences between the two processors. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 225T has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.90 GHz. Despite a lower base clock, the Core Ultra 5 225T reaches a slightly higher boost clock, which contributes to its single-threaded lead.

Thermal design power differs by 5 watts: the Core 3 201E is rated at 60 W, while the Core Ultra 5 225T is rated at 65 W. Given the much higher performance of the Core Ultra 5 225T, the additional 5 W appears to be a minor trade-off. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 3 nm, likely explains how the Core Ultra 5 225T delivers more performance within a similar power envelope.

Memory bandwidth is recorded at 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201E and 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 5 225T. Both are dual-channel, but the Core Ultra 5 225T supports only DDR5, while the Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5. The higher bandwidth of the Core Ultra 5 225T aligns with its superior performance in memory-intensive tests like data compression and encryption.

Release dates differ by a few days: the Core 3 201E was released on 2025-01-12, and the Core Ultra 5 225T was released on 2024-12-31. The Core 3 201E has a launch MSRP of $134, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 225T. Both processors have locked multipliers. The part number for the Core 3 201E is SRVTR, while the Core Ultra 5 225T part number is listed as unknown.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Core Ultra 5 225T has more physical cores but no thread-doubling technology.

Q: What is the single-threaded performance difference?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 3101 versus 1780 for the Core 3 201E, a 42.6% delta. In PassMark single-thread, the scores are 4348 versus 3482, a 19.9% delta.

Q: Do these processors use the same motherboard socket?

A: No. The Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 225T uses Intel Socket 1851. They are not interchangeable.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types are supported?

A: The Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 5 225T supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare to rival processors?

A: The Core 3 201E has an average score of 19056, close to the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 19047 and the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19039. The Core Ultra 5 225T has an average score of 30468, close to the Intel Core i9-11980HK at 30422 and the Intel Core i5-13600H at 30548.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 225T wins in every recorded benchmark category, so the use-case split is defined by the degree of advantage rather than the direction. The largest wins for the Core Ultra 5 225T are in floating point math (59.8% delta), data encryption (51.2% delta), and prime number calculation (79.9% delta). These are workloads that benefit from the newer 3 nm process, larger caches, and higher core count.

The Core 3 201E shows its smallest disadvantages in single-threaded tests (19.9% delta in PassMark) and integer math (26.3% delta). For users constrained to the Intel Socket 1700 platform, the Core 3 201E remains a viable entry-level option, especially given its support for DDR4 memory and ECC. The recorded data shows no benchmark where the Core 3 201E leads, so any selection of that processor must be based on platform compatibility or the lower launch MSRP of $134, not on measured performance.

The Core Ultra 5 225T is the stronger choice for multi-threaded rendering, as shown by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21971 versus 12613. It also excels in compression (233998 versus 164160) and random string sorting (28774 versus 17783), making it suited for data-heavy tasks. The single-threaded lead, while smaller, still favors the Core Ultra 5 225T across all recorded tests. The data indicates that the Core Ultra 5 225T is positioned for mid-range desktop workloads, while the Core 3 201E serves the entry-level segment where its 60 W TDP and socket 1700 compatibility may be the deciding factors.