Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T Comparison

Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225T

The database records two distinct desktop processors from Intel, separated by architecture generation and design philosophy. The Core 3 201TE is a Bartlett Lake part on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, while the Core Ultra 5 225T belongs to the Arrow Lake-S family on Intel Socket 1851. Benchmark data for the Core 3 201TE is absent, meaning all quantitative comparisons rely on the recorded scores for the Core Ultra 5 225T. The Core Ultra 5 225T holds an average benchmark score of 30,468 and sits at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs, while the Core 3 201TE is listed at the 50th percentile with no recorded average score. The Core Ultra 5 225T therefore stands as the measured performer in this pairing, with the Core 3 201TE’s capabilities inferred from its specifications rather than direct test results.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 225T wins on every recorded benchmark metric, as it is the only processor in this comparison with benchmark entries. Its single-core performance is strong, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3,101 and a Passmark single-thread score of 4,348. These numbers place it ahead of several mobile rivals in the database, including the Intel Core i9-11980HK, AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS, Intel Core i5-13600H, and AMD Ryzen 7 7736U, with delta percentages ranging from -0.3 to 0.3. The Core Ultra 5 225T shows a 0.2 percent lead over the Core i9-11980HK, a 0.3 percent lead over the Ryzen 5 7640HS, a 0.3 percent lead over the Ryzen 7 7736U, and a 0.3 percent deficit against the Core i5-13600H, which scores 30,548.

Multi-threaded workloads also favor the Core Ultra 5 225T. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 21,971 and Cinebench R20 multi-core score of 9,227 indicate substantial parallel capability. The processor’s 10 cores and 10 threads handle integer math, floating-point math, and data compression efficiently, with Passmark scores of 59,543 for integer math, 82,751 for floating-point math, and 233,998 for data compression. The Core 3 201TE, with 4 cores and 8 threads, cannot match this throughput on paper, and no recorded data exists to suggest otherwise. The Core Ultra 5 225T also wins in memory bandwidth, as it supports DDR5 with a recorded bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s.

The Core 3 201TE holds advantages in power draw and platform compatibility. Its TDP is 45 watts versus 65 watts for the Core Ultra 5 225T, making it a lower-power option. It also supports Intel Socket 1700, which is an older platform, and includes ECC memory support, a feature the Core Ultra 5 225T lacks. For users prioritizing low power consumption or ECC functionality, the Core 3 201TE has a conceptual edge, but for raw performance across every tested workload, the Core Ultra 5 225T is the sole winner.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different manufacturing and design eras. The Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel, with a die size of 163 mm². Its architecture is listed as Bartlett Lake, and it belongs to the Core 3 generation. The Core Ultra 5 225T uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and a transistor count of 17,800 million. Its architecture is Arrow Lake, part of the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. The process node difference is significant: the Core Ultra 5 225T’s 3 nm node allows for denser transistors and improved efficiency per watt, though its TDP is higher at 65 watts.

Core and cache configurations diverge sharply. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, with 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads, with 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 20 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 225T’s larger cache hierarchy, particularly the 20 MB L3 versus 12 MB, benefits workloads with repeated data access. The lack of hyper-threading on the Core Ultra 5 225T, reflected in its 10 threads for 10 cores, contrasts with the Core 3 201TE’s 8 threads from 4 cores, which implies hyper-threading is present.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 225T supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Core Ultra 5 225T achieves a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. ECC memory is available on the Core 3 201TE but not on the Core Ultra 5 225T. PCIe lanes also differ: the Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 225T provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes, offering more expansion headroom for GPUs or storage.

Integrated graphics distinguish the pair. The Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 225T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics with 16 execution units. The Arc graphics solution is newer and designed for better media and compute performance, though no benchmark scores for either iGPU are recorded in this data. The release dates show the Core Ultra 5 225T launched on 2024-12-31, while the Core 3 201TE launched on 2025-01-12, making the Core 3 a slightly newer product despite its older architecture.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

No head-to-head benchmark entries exist in the database for this pair, so the comparison relies on the Core Ultra 5 225T’s standalone scores. The most telling numbers come from Cinebench and Passmark suites. In Cinebench R23, the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 3,101 in single-core and 21,971 in multi-core, a ratio of roughly 7:1 favoring multi-core. In Cinebench R20, the scores are 1,302 single-core and 9,227 multi-core. Cinebench R15 shows 312 single-core and 2,214 multi-core. These results indicate a processor that scales well with core count, which aligns with its 10-core design.

Passmark results reinforce this pattern. The multi-thread score of 25,358 far exceeds the single-thread score of 4,348. Data compression scores 233,998, data encryption scores 18,289, and extended instructions score 20,083. Integer math scores 59,543, while floating-point math scores 82,751, showing a clear strength in floating-point operations. Find prime numbers scores 284, and random string sorting scores 28,774. Physics scores 2,053. These numbers suggest the Core Ultra 5 225T handles scientific, encryption, and data-processing tasks with ease.

Against its nearest rivals, the Core Ultra 5 225T’s average score of 30,468 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i9-11980HK’s 30,422, a 0.2 percent advantage. It leads the AMD Ryzen 5 7640HS (30,390) by 0.3 percent and the AMD Ryzen 7 7736U (30,364) by 0.3 percent. It trails the Intel Core i5-13600H (30,548) by 0.3 percent. These deltas are small, indicating the Core Ultra 5 225T performs at a level comparable to these established mobile and desktop parts. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmarks, so its performance relative to these rivals cannot be quantified.

The Core 3 201TE’s lack of scores means the database shows zero wins for it and zero wins for the Core Ultra 5 225T in head-to-head tests. However, the specification gap is wide: 4 cores versus 10, 12 MB L3 versus 20 MB, 76.8 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. Even without direct testing, the Core Ultra 5 225T’s recorded scores and higher percentile (82 versus 50) indicate a decisive performance advantage in multi-threaded and single-threaded workloads.

FAQ

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 225T support ECC memory?

A: No, the database lists ECC memory as false for the Core Ultra 5 225T, while the Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the Core 3 201TE has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference between the two?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, a difference of 25.6 GB/s.

Q: How many cores does each processor have?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T has 20 MB of shared L3 cache, compared to 12 MB for the Core 3 201TE.

Q: What is the launch date for each?

A: The Core Ultra 5 225T launched on 2024-12-31, and the Core 3 201TE launched on 2025-01-12.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 225T has 10 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the Core 3 and 2.50 GHz for the Core Ultra, but boost clocks favor the Core Ultra at 4.90 GHz versus 4.60 GHz. TDP differs by 20 watts: 45 watts for the Core 3, 65 watts for the Core Ultra.

Sockets are incompatible: Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 3, Intel Socket 1851 for the Core Ultra. Process nodes are 10 nm for the Core 3 and 3 nm for the Core Ultra, with the Core Ultra using TSMC as the foundry. The Core Ultra has a larger die at 243 mm² versus 163 mm², and a transistor count of 17,800 million, which is not listed for the Core 3. Cache sizes differ across all levels: L1 is 80 KB per core for the Core 3 versus 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra, L2 is 1.25 MB per core versus 3 MB per core, and L3 is 12 MB shared versus 20 MB shared.

Memory support differs: the Core 3 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra supports only DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 and 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra. ECC memory is true for the Core 3 and false for the Core Ultra. PCIe lanes are Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 3 and Gen 5 with 20 lanes for the Core Ultra. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 3 and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 16EU for the Core Ultra. The Core 3 has a launch MSRP of $134, while the Core Ultra has no listed launch MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers, and both are listed as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The data points to the Core Ultra 5 225T as the superior performer for almost any computing task. Its 10 cores, 20 MB L3 cache, and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth give it a clear structural advantage over the Core 3 201TE’s 4 cores, 12 MB L3, and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth. Recorded benchmarks confirm this: the Core Ultra 5 225T scores 21,971 in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 4,348 in Passmark single-thread, placing it at the 82nd percentile among all CPUs. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded scores and sits at the 50th percentile, indicating a mid-range position.

The Core 3 201TE appeals to a narrower set of requirements. Its 45-watt TDP is lower, making it a candidate for power-constrained builds. ECC memory support is a distinguishing feature, useful for error-sensitive workloads. Its support for DDR4 allows for cheaper memory options, and its Intel Socket 1700 platform may be compatible with existing motherboards. However, the Core Ultra 5 225T offers more PCIe lanes (20 versus 16), a newer 3 nm process, and a newer integrated graphics solution with Arc Xe-LPG. For users prioritizing performance, the Core Ultra 5 225T is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For users prioritizing low power, ECC support, or DDR4 compatibility, the Core 3 201TE has specific advantages that the benchmarks do not counter.