Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 238V Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors into very distinct roles. The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, making it the dominant performer across nearly every workload category. Its victories span Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests, plus PassMark tests for data compression, encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, floating point math, multithreading, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread performance.

The Intel Core 3 201E claims exactly one victory: PassMark integer math, where it scores 43894 against the Core Ultra 5 238V's 38889, a 12.9% advantage. This single win indicates the Core 3 201E has a specific strength in integer-heavy arithmetic, a workload that benefits from its higher boost clock and desktop-oriented design. The remainder of the field belongs to the Core Ultra 5 238V, which shows particularly large margins in floating point math (37.4% ahead), prime number finding (67.2% ahead), and data encryption (31.7% ahead).

The average benchmark scores reinforce this split. The Core Ultra 5 238V averages 21981 across all recorded benchmarks, placing it in the 75th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 201E averages 19056, placing it in the 73rd percentile. The 19.4% deficits seen consistently across all six Cinebench tests suggest a fundamental performance gap rather than workload-specific variation, while the PassMark tests show a wider range of differences, from the 7% margin in data compression to the 67.2% margin in prime number calculations.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages with contrasting physical implementations. The Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, manufactured on Intel's 10 nm process with a die size of 163 mm². It is a desktop part built for Intel Socket 1700. The Core Ultra 5 238V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process, and is a mobile part built for Intel BGA 2833. The process node difference, 10 nm versus 3 nm, explains much of the efficiency gap, particularly given the thermal and power constraints of their respective market segments.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Both use a dual-channel memory bus, but the Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 5 238V's memory support is listed as dependent on the motherboard with no recorded bandwidth figure. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory; the Core Ultra 5 238V does not.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and distribution. The Core 3 201E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 238V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 238V's larger per-core L1 and L2 caches help its single-thread performance, while the Core 3 201E's larger shared L3 cache benefits its multi-core workloads given its fewer cores.

PCIe connectivity also diverges. The Core 3 201E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, suited for desktop expansion. The Core Ultra 5 238V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU, a mobile-oriented configuration. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 201E carries UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 238V carries Arc 130V. The production status for both is Active, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 238V has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Core 3 201E runs at a much higher base frequency, while the Core Ultra 5 238V reaches nearly the same boost frequency despite its much lower 17 W TDP compared to the Core 3 201E's 60 W TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V scores 15645 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 19.4% ahead of the Intel Core 3 201E's 12613.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 201E win any benchmark comparisons?

A: Yes, the Core 3 201E wins PassMark integer math with a score of 43894, 12.9% ahead of the Core Ultra 5 238V's 38889. This is its only win across the 17 recorded head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two processors?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a TDP of 60 W, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 238V has a TDP of 17 W. The Core Ultra 5 238V delivers higher performance in most tests despite consuming far less power.

Q: How do their single-thread scores compare?

A: In PassMark single-thread, the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 3890 versus the Core 3 201E's 3482, a 10.5% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 2208 versus 1780, a 19.4% advantage.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V does not support ECC memory.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core Ultra 5 238V |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.10 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.70 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 17 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2833 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Lunar 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) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | Depends on motherboard |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 4 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc 130V |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-09-23 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRVTR | SRPN5SRPN4 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite shows a uniform 19.4% advantage for the Core Ultra 5 238V across all six tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 1576 against the Core 3 201E's 1271. In R15 single-core, the scores are 222 versus 179. R20 multi-core shows 6570 versus 5297, and R20 single-core shows 927 versus 747. R23 multi-core shows 15645 versus 12613, and R23 single-core shows 2208 versus 1780. This consistency across different Cinebench versions indicates the performance gap scales proportionally with workload intensity, not just with core count or clock speed.

The PassMark suite reveals a more varied picture. The largest margin comes in find prime numbers, where the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 174 against the Core 3 201E's 57, a 67.2% advantage. This test heavily favors the Core Ultra 5 238V's architecture, likely due to its larger per-core caches and newer process node. Floating point math shows a 37.4% gap, with scores of 53160 versus 33260. Data encryption shows a 31.7% gap, with scores of 13072 versus 8931. Extended instructions show a 28.2% gap, with scores of 15377 versus 11035.

Physics simulations favor the Core Ultra 5 238V by 26.2%, with scores of 1546 versus 1141. Multithread performance shows a 19.4% gap, with scores of 18407 versus 14839. Random string sorting shows a 17.6% gap, with scores of 21585 versus 17783. Single-thread performance shows a 10.5% gap, with scores of 3890 versus 3482. Data compression shows the smallest Core Ultra 5 238V win at 7%, with scores of 176532 versus 164160.

The single exception is PassMark integer math. The Core 3 201E scores 43894, while the Core Ultra 5 238V scores 38889. This 12.9% advantage for the Core 3 201E stands out because it contradicts the otherwise uniform pattern of Core Ultra 5 238V dominance. The Core 3 201E's higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.80 GHz likely contribute to this result, as integer arithmetic often scales with raw clock speed rather than architectural efficiency. The Core 3 201E's larger 12 MB L3 cache may also help in workloads that fit within that shared cache, whereas the Core Ultra 5 238V's 8 MB L3 is smaller despite its faster per-core L1 and L2.

The overall benchmark distribution positions the Core Ultra 5 238V at the 75th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 201E sits at the 73rd percentile. The Core Ultra 5 238V's nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-11700F with a matching average score of 21988 and the AMD Ryzen 5 3600X at 21992, both within 0.1% of its average. The Core 3 201E's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS at 19047, the Intel Core i5-12400F at 19039, and the Intel Core i5-1335U at 18982, all within 0.4% of its average. These proximity values confirm that the performance gap between the two processors aligns with their respective positions in the broader CPU landscape, with the Core Ultra 5 238V competing against older desktop i7 parts and the Core 3 201E competing against mid-range desktop and mobile offerings.