Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX Comparison

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX wins every single recorded benchmark. Out of 17 head-to-head tests, it takes 17 victories. The Intel Core 3 201E does not win a single test. The average benchmark score of the Core Ultra 7 255HX is 62,738, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 201E averages 19,056, placing it in the 73rd percentile. The performance gap is not a matter of fine margins; it is a wide chasm across every workload category.

For users who need maximum computational throughput in a mobile platform, the Core Ultra 7 255HX is the clear choice. It delivers significantly higher scores in every multi-core, single-core, and specialized instruction test. Its 20 cores and 20 threads, combined with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, produce results that the 4-core, 8-thread Core 3 201E cannot approach. The Core Ultra 7 255HX also offers an unlocked multiplier, which allows for user-driven clock adjustments.

The Intel Core 3 201E, by contrast, is a desktop processor aimed at a different role. Its data shows a capable performer in its own class, with a 73rd percentile ranking. It sits within 0.4% of the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and Intel Core i5-12400F in average score, indicating it is a competitive entry-level desktop option. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, includes ECC memory support, and has a launch MSRP of $134. For a desktop system that does not demand extreme multi-core throughput, the 201E remains a sensible option, but it loses decisively to the 255HX in every measured performance metric.

The choice is straightforward. The Core Ultra 7 255HX is for high-performance mobile computing. The Core 3 201E is for a low-cost desktop build where its strengths in memory flexibility and ECC support matter more than raw speed.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has an average benchmark score of 62,738, while the Intel Core 3 201E has an average score of 19,056. This places the 255HX in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs and the 201E in the 73rd percentile.

Q: How do they compare in terms of core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What is the difference in their boost clocks?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The Intel Core 3 201E has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz.

Q: Do they use the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor has ECC memory support?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX does not support ECC memory.

Q: How large is the difference in the Cinebench R23 multi-core test?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 32,612, which is 61.3% higher than the Intel Core 3 201E's score of 12,613.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design lineages. The Intel Core 3 201E is based on Bartlett Lake and is manufactured on a 10 nm process by Intel. Its die size is 163 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is based on Arrow Lake-HX and is manufactured on a 3 nm process by TSMC. It has a die size of 243 mm² and contains 17,800 million transistors.

The cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 3 201E has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core, and a shared L3 cache of 12 MB. The Core Ultra 7 255HX has a larger L1 cache of 192 KB per core, an L2 cache of 3 MB per core, and a shared L3 cache of 30 MB. These larger caches on the 255HX help explain its superior performance in data-heavy workloads.

The integrated graphics also differ. The Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core Ultra 7 255HX uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The market segments are distinct: the 201E is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700, while the 255HX is a mobile processor on Intel BGA 2114. The production status for both is listed as Active, and both were released on the same date.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several key specification fields. The core count is 4 for the 201E versus 20 for the 255HX. The thread count is 8 versus 20. The base clock of the 201E is 3.60 GHz, while the 255HX has a lower base clock of 2.40 GHz. The boost clock of the 201E is 4.80 GHz, while the 255HX boosts higher to 5.20 GHz.

The TDP is 60 watts for the 201E and 55 watts for the 255HX. The 201E uses Intel Socket 1700 and supports DDR4 and DDR5. The 255HX uses Intel BGA 2114 and supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the 201E and 102.4 GB/s for the 255HX. The 201E has ECC memory support; the 255HX does not. The PCIe configuration is Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the 201E and Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the 255HX.

The 201E has a launch MSRP of $134. The 255HX has no recorded launch MSRP. The 201E has a locked multiplier, while the 255HX has an unlocked multiplier. The process node is 10 nm for the 201E and 3 nm for the 255HX. The die size is 163 mm² versus 243 mm².

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a consistent pattern of dominance by the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX. In the Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the 255HX scores 4,916 against the 201E's 1,271, a delta of 74.1% in favor of the 255HX. The single-core R15 test shows a smaller but still large gap: 327 versus 179, a 45.3% advantage.

The Cinebench R20 results reinforce the trend. Multi-core scores are 17,187 for the 255HX and 5,297 for the 201E, a 69.2% difference. Single-core scores are 2,426 versus 747, also a 69.2% difference. In Cinebench R23, the multi-core test shows the 255HX at 32,612 against 12,613, a 61.3% lead. The single-core R23 test shows 2,163 versus 1,780, a 17.7% advantage.

PassMark tests follow the same pattern. Data compression scores are 515,143 for the 255HX and 164,160 for the 201E, a 68.1% difference. Data encryption shows 39,499 versus 8,931, a 77.4% gap. Extended instructions score 41,247 against 11,035, a 73.2% difference. Finding prime numbers shows 400 versus 57, an 85.7% gap, the largest margin in any test.

Floating point math favors the 255HX at 160,624 versus 33,260, a 79.3% difference. Integer math scores are 127,126 versus 43,894, a 65.5% gap. The multithread test shows 48,234 versus 14,839, a 69.2% difference. Physics scores are 2,926 versus 1,141, a 61% gap. Random string sorting shows 62,591 versus 17,783, a 71.6% difference. Single-thread performance is 4,562 versus 3,482, a 23.7% advantage.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX wins all 17 recorded benchmarks. Its largest margins come in tasks that benefit from many cores and high memory bandwidth. The 85.7% lead in finding prime numbers, the 79.3% lead in floating point math, and the 77.4% lead in data encryption all point to a processor designed for heavy computational lifting. Its 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth and 30 MB L3 cache support these results.

The Intel Core 3 201E does not win any benchmark. It is not a competitor in raw performance. Its strengths lie elsewhere. It supports DDR4 and DDR5, which provides flexibility in memory selection. It has ECC memory support, which is important for specific reliability-focused desktop applications. It also has a lower TDP of 60 watts, which is modest for a desktop processor, and a smaller die size of 163 mm².

The use-case split is clear. The 255HX is for workloads that demand maximum throughput: rendering, encryption, complex simulations, and multi-threaded productivity. The 201E is for simple desktop tasks where the processor's memory flexibility, ECC capability, and lower cost are relevant. The data does not support any other conclusion.