Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H wins every single recorded test, 17 out of 17 head-to-head comparisons. The Core 3 201E does not secure a single victory in any workload category, making the performance gap structural rather than workload-dependent.

Starting with multi-core rendering, the Ultra 5 235H delivers 2580 in Cinebench R15 multicore versus 1271 for the Core 3 201E, a 50.7% advantage. The gap persists in Cinebench R20 multicore, where the Ultra 5 scores 10751 against 5297, again a 50.7% difference. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Ultra 5 reaches 25598 while the Core 3 manages 12613, keeping the same 50.7% margin. These consistent deltas suggest the Ultra 5's advantage scales linearly across all Cinebench versions.

Single-core performance tells a similar story. Cinebench R15 singlecore shows the Ultra 5 at 364 versus 179 for the Core 3, a 50.8% lead. Cinebench R20 singlecore repeats the pattern: 1517 versus 747, a 50.8% edge. Cinebench R23 singlecore shows 3613 against 1780, a 50.7% margin. The single-core gap is proportionally identical to the multi-core gap, indicating the Ultra 5's architectural superiority is not limited to thread scaling but extends to per-thread efficiency.

PassMark results amplify the divide. The largest delta appears in find prime numbers, where the Ultra 5 scores 239 against 57, a 76.2% advantage. Floating point math shows 93509 versus 33260, a 64.4% gap. Data encryption delivers 23121 against 8931, a 61.4% difference. Extended instructions measure 23354 versus 11035, a 52.7% lead. Random string sorting shows 36208 versus 17783, a 50.9% gap. Data compression reaches 301979 versus 164160, a 45.6% difference. Integer math shows 74247 versus 43894, a 40.9% lead. Physics tests record 1985 versus 1141, a 42.5% margin. Multithread performance hits 30091 against 14839, a 50.7% difference.

The smallest relative gap appears in PassMark single-thread: 4359 versus 3482, a 20.1% lead. This narrower margin confirms that while the Ultra 5 excels at single-core tasks, its multi-core advantage is even more pronounced. Average benchmark scores reinforce the hierarchy: the Ultra 5 sits at 37522, placing it in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 averages 19056, sitting in the 73rd percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally at the silicon level. The Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake architecture on Intel's 10 nm process, fabricated in-house by Intel. It packs 4 cores and 8 threads, with base and boost clocks of 3.60 GHz and 4.80 GHz respectively. The Ultra 5 235H uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-H, built on TSMC's 3 nm process. It contains 14 cores and 14 threads, with a 2.40 GHz base clock and 5.00 GHz boost clock. The absence of hyperthreading on the Ultra 5 (14 threads from 14 cores) versus the Core 3's 8 threads from 4 cores indicates a different core topology.

Cache hierarchies reflect the core count disparity. The Core 3 has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The per-core L1 and L2 figures are 2.4x and 2.4x larger respectively on the Ultra 5, while total L3 is 50% higher.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, with 76.8 GB/s of bandwidth. The Ultra 5 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with 102.4 GB/s. The bandwidth advantage of the Ultra 5 is 33.3%. ECC memory is supported on the Core 3 but not on the Ultra 5.

PCIe configuration changes dramatically. The Core 3 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 5 offers Gen 5 with only 8 lanes. This makes the Core 3 more suitable for expansion-heavy desktop builds.

Integrated graphics differ significantly. The Core 3 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 5 ships with Arc Graphics 140T. The latter represents Intel's dedicated graphics architecture integrated onto the package.

Power and platform targets diverge completely. The Core 3 has a 60 W TDP and uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop platform. The Ultra 5 has a 28 W TDP and uses Intel BGA 2049, a mobile platform. The die size of the Core 3 is 163 mm², while no die size is recorded for the Ultra 5. Both are produced by Intel as foundry for the Core 3, but the Ultra 5 uses TSMC.

Where Each One Wins

Given that the Ultra 5 235H wins all 17 head-to-head benchmarks, the Core 3 201E has no recorded performance wins. However, the two serve entirely different market segments, and the data shows where each processor's characteristics fit best.

The Core 3 201E is a desktop part with a Socket 1700 platform, 60 W TDP, and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Its ECC memory support and DDR4 compatibility position it for systems requiring reliability and legacy memory compatibility. The larger PCIe lane count supports more expansion cards or storage devices directly from the CPU.

The Ultra 5 235H is a mobile part with a 28 W TDP, BGA 2049 socket, and 8 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. Its LPDDR5X support suits power-constrained laptops. The 14-core configuration with 18 MB L3 cache delivers the multi-threaded throughput that dominates the benchmark results.

In single-thread workloads, the Ultra 5 leads by 20.1%, a smaller margin than its multi-core advantage. This indicates the Core 3's 4.80 GHz boost clock partially compensates for the architectural gap in lightly threaded scenarios. The data shows the Ultra 5's 5.00 GHz boost clock and newer 3 nm process combine for better per-thread efficiency despite a lower base clock.

For integer math, the Ultra 5 leads by 40.9%, while floating point math shows a 64.4% gap. This suggests the Ultra 5's wider execution resources benefit floating-point-heavy applications more than integer workloads. Data compression shows a 45.6% lead, while data encryption shows a 61.4% lead, indicating the Ultra 5 has stronger cryptographic acceleration.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear choice based on platform and workload requirements. For mobile computing, the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H is the only viable option between the two, as it uses a BGA 2049 socket and 28 W TDP, while the Core 3 uses Socket 1700 and 60 W TDP. The Ultra 5 delivers 50.7% higher multi-core Cinebench scores, 20.1% higher single-thread PassMark scores, and a 97.0% higher average benchmark score (37522 versus 19056).

For desktop systems where the Core 3 201E applies, its advantages are platform-specific rather than performance-based. It offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 8 on the Ultra 5, ECC memory support, DDR4 compatibility, and a 163 mm² die size. The Core 3 also has a launch MSRP of $134, though no pricing data exists for the Ultra 5.

The percentile rankings confirm the hierarchy: the Ultra 5 sits in the 85th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 sits in the 73rd. The nearest rivals for the Ultra 5 include the Intel Core i9-13900HK with a 0.3% delta, and the Intel Core i5-13600K with a -0.4% delta. The Core 3's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS with a 0% delta and the Intel Core i5-12400F with a 0.1% delta. Both processors sit near their closest competitors, but the Ultra 5 operates in a higher absolute performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds of each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The Intel Core 3 201E has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H does not support ECC memory.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a TDP of 60 W. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has a TDP of 28 W.

Q: What integrated graphics does each processor use?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H uses Arc Graphics 140T.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has an average benchmark score of 37522, placing it in the 85th percentile. The Intel Core 3 201E has an average benchmark score of 19056, placing it in the 73rd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core Ultra 5 235H |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 4 | 14 |

| Threads | 8 | 14 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 28 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2049 |

| Architecture | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Graphics 140T |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRVTR | SRQAP |