Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 201TE and Intel Core 7 160UL serve different workload profiles despite sharing the same desktop socket. The Core 3 201TE is a 4-core, 8-thread part built on Bartlett Lake, while the Core 7 160UL is a 10-core, 12-thread Raptor Lake-PS processor. The recorded benchmark data covers only the Core 7 160UL, which limits direct comparison, but the specification differences reveal where each processor would hold an advantage.

The Core 3 201TE wins on raw single-core frequency potential with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz compared to 5.20 GHz on the Core 7 160UL. However, the Core 7 160UL has a higher base clock ceiling per thread in multicore workloads due to its additional cores. The Core 7 160UL also delivers superior integrated graphics with Iris Xe Graphics 96EU versus UHD Graphics 730 on the Core 3 201TE, making it the stronger choice for tasks that rely on the iGPU.

The Core 3 201TE wins on PCIe bandwidth, offering Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only) on the Core 7 160UL. This makes the Core 3 201TE more suitable for systems with high-throughput storage or expansion cards. The Core 3 201TE also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the Core 7 160UL, which gives it an edge in reliability-sensitive deployments.

The Core 7 160UL wins on power efficiency with a 15 W TDP versus 45 W on the Core 3 201TE. The Core 7 160UL also has a higher average benchmark score of 14232 and sits at the 69th percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmarks and sits at the 50th percentile. The Core 7 160UL further wins on thread count for parallel workloads, offering 12 threads versus 8.

Architecture Differences

The two processors use different underlying architectures. The Core 3 201TE is based on Bartlett Lake, while the Core 7 160UL uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename. Both are built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry, and both use the Intel Socket 1700.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. This indicates the Core 7 160UL likely uses a hybrid core arrangement, though the database does not specify performance versus efficiency core counts. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core, and L2 cache matches at 1.25 MB per core. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache.

Memory support is the same for both: DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory bus. The Core 3 201TE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 7 160UL has no bandwidth figure in the database. The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory; the Core 7 160UL does not.

Integrated graphics differ substantially. The Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 160UL features Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, which indicates a higher execution unit count and likely better graphical throughput. PCIe connectivity also diverges: the Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 160UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

The Core 3 201TE has a die size of 163 mm², while the Core 7 160UL has no recorded die size. The Core 3 201TE has a known part number (SRPKDQ5CK), while the Core 7 160UL's part number is unknown. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark results between the Core 3 201TE and the Core 7 160UL. However, the Core 7 160UL has a full set of recorded benchmark scores across multiple test suites, while the Core 3 201TE has none.

For the Core 7 160UL, the Cinebench R23 multicore score is 9386, with a single-core score of 1325. In Cinebench R20, the multicore score is 3942 and single-core is 556. Cinebench R15 shows a multicore score of 946 and single-core of 133. These scores place the Core 7 160UL at the 69th percentile among all CPUs.

PassMark results for the Core 7 160UL include a multithread score of 11043 and a single-thread score of 3391. Data compression reaches 108953, while data encryption scores 7146. Extended instructions deliver 5832, and floating point math reaches 25670. Integer math scores 47515, physics scores 819, random string sorting scores 11843, and finding prime numbers scores 50.

The average benchmark score for the Core 7 160UL is 14232. Its nearest rivals in the database are the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C with an average score of 14277 (0.3% ahead of the Core 7 160UL), the Intel Core i5-10400F with 14185 (0.3% behind), the Intel Xeon 6756E with 14163 (0.5% behind), and the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U with 14320 (0.6% ahead). These deltas are small, indicating the Core 7 160UL sits in a tightly contested performance band.

Without recorded benchmarks for the Core 3 201TE, the data cannot show a direct performance comparison. The Core 3 201TE's lower core and thread counts suggest it would trail in multicore workloads, but its higher boost clock of 4.60 GHz compared to the Core 7 160UL's 1.80 GHz base clock indicates potential single-thread strength, though the Core 7 160UL's 5.20 GHz boost clock exceeds it.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to distinct use cases for each processor. The Core 3 201TE suits systems that prioritize PCIe Gen 5 connectivity and ECC memory support. Its 16 lanes of Gen 5 PCIe and ECC capability make it appropriate for storage-heavy or reliability-focused desktop builds. The Core 3 201TE also has a known launch MSRP of $134, while the Core 7 160UL has no recorded MSRP.

The Core 7 160UL suits workloads that benefit from more cores and threads, with 10 cores and 12 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads. Its benchmark scores, including a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 9386 and a PassMark multithread score of 11043, demonstrate strong parallel performance. The Core 7 160UL also wins on power efficiency with a 15 W TDP, making it suitable for low-power desktop configurations.

For integrated graphics demands, the Core 7 160UL is the clear choice with Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The Core 3 201TE's UHD Graphics 730 is less capable. The Core 7 160UL's 69th percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 14232 indicate it performs above the median CPU, while the Core 3 201TE's 50th percentile ranking with no benchmark data reflects an unverified performance profile.

Users who need ECC memory or maximum PCIe bandwidth should select the Core 3 201TE. Users who need multicore throughput, lower power draw, or better integrated graphics should select the Core 7 160UL. The data does not support a single winner; the choice depends on workload priorities.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Does the Core 3 201TE support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 160UL does not support ECC memory.

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

A: The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 W, while the Core 7 160UL has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core 7 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, while the Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 7 160UL has the higher execution unit count.

Q: What PCIe generation does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Core 7 160UL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only).

Q: What is the Core 7 160UL's average benchmark score?

A: The Core 7 160UL has an average benchmark score of 14232 and sits at the 69th percentile among all CPUs. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201TE | Intel Core 7 160UL |

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

| Architecture | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) | Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) |

| Cores | 4 | 10 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 1.80 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | Not recorded |

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

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

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

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

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRPKDQ5CK | Unknown |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 50 | 69 |

| Average Benchmark Score | 0 | 14232 |