Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core 7 250H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark records for the Intel Core 3 201TE against the Intel Core 7 250H. However, the Core 7 250H has a substantial set of recorded measurements, and its percentile standing provides context for comparison. The Core 3 201TE has no benchmark scores on file, meaning its performance can only be inferred from its specifications, not from measured results.

The Core 7 250H sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs in the database, placing it well above the Core 3 201TE, which sits at the 50th percentile. That 35-point percentile gap indicates a large performance chasm between the two parts, even without a direct test run.

Looking at the Core 7 250H's absolute scores, its Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 16561 points and single-core result of 1931 points show a processor capable of both heavy threaded workloads and responsive single-threaded tasks. In Cinebench R20, it records 9697 multi-core and 1368 single-core. The older Cinebench R15 test shows 3147 multi-core and 298 single-core. These scores consistently rank it among faster mobile processors.

The Passmark suite reinforces that picture. The Core 7 250H scores 27030 in multi-thread, 4148 in single-thread, 99100 in integer math, 65094 in floating point math, and 303269 in data compression. Its data encryption result of 18206 and extended instructions score of 17318 further demonstrate strong computational throughput. The physics test records 1824, and random string sorting hits 34136. The prime numbers test is the outlier at 106, a low score that suggests this workload is not a strength for this architecture.

Since the Core 3 201TE has zero recorded benchmark data, the comparison is one-sided. The Core 7 250H's average benchmark score of 35728 places it in direct competition with the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350, which scores 35719, a 0 percent delta. The Intel Core Ultra 9 185H trails by 0.2 percent at 35670, while the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 5845 leads by 0.2 percent at 35802, and the AMD Ryzen 7 7700X leads by 0.5 percent at 35909. These near-identical scores confirm the Core 7 250H is a well-rounded performer that trades blows with several established desktop and mobile chips.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Core 3 201TE uses Bartlett Lake architecture and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The Core 7 250H uses Raptor Lake architecture and belongs to the Core 7 generation, specifically Raptor Lake Refresh. Both are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and manufactured by Intel, but their design targets differ sharply.

The Core 3 201TE is a desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads. Its base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core 7 250H is a mobile part with 14 cores and 20 threads, running at a 2.50 GHz base clock and 5.40 GHz boost clock. The Core 7 250H has more than triple the core count and more than double the thread count, while also boasting a higher maximum boost frequency. The Core 3 201TE holds a small base clock advantage of 0.40 GHz, but that is irrelevant against the Core 7 250H's thread advantage and higher boost ceiling.

Cache layouts diverge significantly. Both chips use 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The Core 3 201TE has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 250H has 2 MB of L2 per core and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. That doubles the L3 capacity and adds substantially more L2 per core, which helps with data-heavy workloads and multi-threaded scaling.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201TE carries UHD Graphics 730, a basic desktop iGPU. The Core 7 250H uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, a significantly more capable mobile integrated solution with 96 execution units. For systems relying on the iGPU, the Core 7 250H is clearly the stronger option.

Socket and platform requirements are completely different. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, the LGA desktop socket. The Core 7 250H uses Intel BGA 1744, a soldered mobile package. These are not interchangeable platforms. The Core 3 201TE is a drop-in desktop CPU for LGA 1700 motherboards, while the Core 7 250H is permanently attached to a mobile board.

Memory support overlaps on DDR4 and DDR5, and both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core 3 201TE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 7 250H has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory; the Core 7 250H does not. That ECC support makes the desktop chip relevant for error-sensitive workloads, a feature entirely absent from the mobile part.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core 7 250H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The desktop chip offers double the PCIe lane count, which matters for multi-GPU setups, high-bandwidth storage, and expansion cards. The mobile chip's 8 lanes are typical for laptops, where expansion is limited anyway.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 250H wins on raw compute in nearly every measurable dimension. Its 14 cores and 20 threads give it a massive advantage in multi-threaded workloads such as video rendering, 3D modeling, software compilation, and data processing. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16561 and Passmark multi-thread score of 27030 confirm it can handle sustained all-core loads. The 24 MB L3 cache and 2 MB per-core L2 cache reduce memory stalls in cache-sensitive applications. Its 5.40 GHz boost clock also gives it the edge in single-threaded tasks, as shown by the 1931 Cinebench R23 single-core score and 4148 Passmark single-thread score.

The Core 3 201TE wins in platform flexibility and specific desktop-oriented features. It supports ECC memory, which the Core 7 250H cannot use. It offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, double the Core 7 250H's 8 lanes, which suits desktop builds with multiple GPUs or high-speed NVMe arrays. Its Socket 1700 platform allows user-replaceable CPUs and standard desktop cooling solutions, whereas the BGA 1744 package is fixed and not upgradeable. The 76.8 GB/s memory bandwidth is a recorded advantage, though the Core 7 250H's figure is simply absent from the database rather than proven lower.

For gaming, the Core 7 250H's higher boost clock and larger cache should deliver better frame pacing and higher peak performance in CPU-bound titles. The Core 3 201TE's lower core count and smaller cache would limit it in modern games that scale across multiple threads. However, the Core 3 201TE's 16 PCIe lanes give it an advantage in systems with discrete GPUs that need full bandwidth, a scenario common in desktop gaming rigs.

For productivity, the Core 7 250H's Passmark integer math score of 99100 and floating point score of 65094 indicate strong performance in spreadsheet calculations, code compilation, and scientific computing. The data compression score of 303269 shows it handles archiving and file operations efficiently. The Core 3 201TE has no comparable measurements, so its productivity potential remains unquantified.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ in several key specification fields:

• Cores: 4 (Core 3 201TE) vs 14 (Core 7 250H)
• Threads: 8 vs 20
• Base Clock: 2.90 GHz vs 2.50 GHz
• Boost Clock: 4.60 GHz vs 5.40 GHz
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 vs Intel BGA 1744
• Architecture: Bartlett Lake vs Raptor Lake
• Generation: Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) vs Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh)
• Die Size: 163 mm² vs not recorded
• L2 Cache: 1.25 MB per core vs 2 MB per core
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared vs 24 MB shared
• Memory Bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s vs not recorded
• ECC Memory: Supported vs not supported
• PCIe Lanes: 16 Gen 5 lanes vs 8 Gen 5 lanes
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 730 vs Iris Xe Graphics 96EU
• Market Segment: Desktop vs Mobile
• Release Date: 2025-01-12 vs 2024-12-17
• Launch MSRP: $134 vs $502
• Part Number: SRPKDQ5CK vs SRQ6UQ5MK
• Average Benchmark Score: 0 vs 35728
• Percentile vs All CPUs: 50th vs 85th

Both share the same process node (10 nm), foundry (Intel), L1 cache size (80 KB per core), memory support (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), and production status (Active). Neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not officially supported on either chip.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 250H has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Core 7 250H boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Core 3 201TE boosts to 4.60 GHz. The Core 7 250H has a 0.80 GHz higher boost clock. The Core 3 201TE has a higher base clock at 2.90 GHz versus 2.50 GHz.

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

A: Yes, the Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory. The Core 7 250H does not support ECC memory.

Q: How do their benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core 7 250H has an average benchmark score of 35728 and sits at the 85th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores and sits at the 50th percentile.

Q: Which CPU has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core 3 201TE provides 16 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU. The Core 7 250H provides 8 Gen 5 lanes from the CPU.

Q: Are these CPUs compatible with the same motherboard?

A: No. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop LGA socket. The Core 7 250H uses Intel BGA 1744, a soldered mobile package.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Core 7 250H. Its 85th percentile standing, average score of 35728, and comprehensive Passmark and Cinebench results demonstrate a processor that competes directly with the AMD Ryzen AI 7 PRO 350 and Intel Core Ultra 9 185H. The Core 3 201TE, with no benchmark scores and a 50th percentile rank, offers no measured evidence of competitive performance.

The Core 7 250H is the right choice for anyone needing multi-threaded throughput, high boost clocks, and a capable integrated GPU. Its 14 cores, 20 threads, 24 MB L3 cache, and 5.40 GHz boost clock make it suitable for demanding mobile workloads, including content creation, software development, and data processing. Its Iris Xe Graphics 96EU provides far stronger integrated graphics than the UHD Graphics 730 in the Core 3 201TE.

The Core 3 201TE is the right choice for desktop builders who value ECC memory support, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and a user-replaceable Socket 1700 platform. Its lower launch MSRP of $134 reflects its more modest specifications, but the database cannot confirm its real-world performance because no benchmarks are recorded. The 4-core, 8-thread configuration and 12 MB L3 cache suggest it is a basic desktop processor, likely suited to entry-level systems where ECC support and PCIe expansion matter more than raw compute.

The verdict is straightforward from the data: the Core 7 250H dominates in measured performance, while the Core 3 201TE offers platform features that the mobile chip cannot match. There is no overlap in their intended use cases. The Core 7 250H is a high-performance mobile processor with proven results. The Core 3 201TE is a desktop part whose performance is unverified but whose feature set targets a different market segment entirely.