Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 236V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data for the Intel Core 3 201TE contains no benchmark scores, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 236V has a full suite of measurements. This makes a direct head-to-head comparison impossible in the traditional sense. The database shows zero benchmark entries for the Core 3 201TE, meaning there are no recorded wins for that processor in any test. The Core Ultra 5 236V, by contrast, has seventeen recorded benchmark results across Cinebench and Passmark suites.

The Core Ultra 5 236V achieves an average benchmark score of 21952, placing it at the 75th percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals show a remarkably tight cluster of performance. The Intel Core Ultra 5 238V scores 21981, a delta of -0.1 percent relative to the 236V. The Intel Core i7-11700F scores 21988, also -0.1 percent. The AMD Ryzen 5 3600X scores 21992, again -0.1 percent. The AMD EPYC 9534 scores 21900, a delta of +0.2 percent. These deltas indicate that the Core Ultra 5 236V sits within a very narrow performance band, effectively tied with three other processors and slightly ahead of the EPYC 9534.

Looking at specific workloads, the Cinebench R23 multicore test shows the Core Ultra 5 236V delivering a score of 15628. The single-core result for the same test is 2206. In Cinebench R20, the multicore score is 6563 and single-core is 926. Cinebench R15 shows 1575 multicore and 222 single-core. Passmark measurements include a multithread score of 18375, a single-thread score of 3893, integer math at 38765, floating point math at 52774, extended instructions at 15451, data compression at 176554, data encryption at 13049, random string sorting at 21628, physics at 1503, and find prime numbers at 171.

The Core 3 201TE holds a 50th percentile position among all CPUs, but without benchmark scores, its actual performance cannot be quantified from the database. The percentile ranking alone suggests it sits in the middle of the distribution, while the Core Ultra 5 236V sits in the upper quartile at the 75th percentile.

Where Each One Wins

Since the Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores, it cannot claim a win in any measured category. The Core Ultra 5 236V wins all seventeen recorded tests by default. The practical interpretation of this data is that the Core 3 201TE has not been tested in the database, so its performance profile remains uncharacterized.

The Core Ultra 5 236V demonstrates its strongest relative performances in data compression and encryption workloads. The data compression score of 176554 is substantially higher than its integer math score of 38765, indicating that the processor handles compression algorithms particularly well. Data encryption at 13049 also shows strength relative to other workloads. Floating point math at 52774 exceeds integer math at 38765, suggesting the architecture favors floating-point operations.

The single-thread performance of 3893 in Passmark and 2206 in Cinebench R23 indicates strong per-core capability. The multicore Cinebench R23 score of 15628, when compared with the single-core score of 2206, suggests scaling efficiency across the eight cores. The multithread Passmark score of 18375 relative to the single-thread 3893 further confirms this scaling pattern.

For users whose workloads match the tested categories, the Core Ultra 5 236V shows measurable capability. The data does not permit any statement about the Core 3 201TE's performance in these or any other workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different architectural families. The Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, belonging to the Core 3 generation. Its process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The die size measures 163 mm². The Core Ultra 5 236V uses the Lunar Lake architecture, belonging to the Core Ultra Series 2 generation. Its process node is 3 nm, fabricated by TSMC.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. The Core Ultra 5 236V has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The thread count parity despite double the core count is a notable architectural divergence.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 3 201TE provides 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 236V provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The Lunar Lake design allocates more private cache per core but less shared L3.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201TE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 5 236V includes Arc 130V. The Arc 130V represents a newer graphics architecture within the Lunar Lake family.

The Core Ultra 5 236V supports ECC memory, a feature typically associated with server or workstation reliability. The Core 3 201TE does not support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The socket types differ completely. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 236V uses Intel BGA 2833. This makes them physically incompatible with each other's motherboards.

Clock speeds show a mixed picture. The Core 3 201TE has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 236V has a lower base clock of 2.10 GHz but a higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The boost advantage of the Core Ultra 5 236V amounts to 0.10 GHz, while the Core 3 201TE holds a 0.80 GHz base clock advantage.

Thermal design power differs dramatically. The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 236V has a TDP of 17 watts. The Core Ultra 5 236V uses less than half the thermal envelope of the Core 3 201TE.

Memory support shows the Core 3 201TE supporting DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 236V's memory support is listed as unknown, dependent on motherboard configuration. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The Core 3 201TE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while no bandwidth figure exists for the Core Ultra 5 236V.

PCI Express lanes differ. The Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 5 236V provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes from the CPU. This represents a substantial difference in expansion capability.

Market segments differ: the Core 3 201TE targets desktop systems, while the Core Ultra 5 236V targets mobile platforms. Production status for both is active. The Core 3 201TE has a launch MSRP of $134, while no launch price exists for the Core Ultra 5 236V. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Release dates show the Core Ultra 5 236V launching on 2024-09-23, while the Core 3 201TE launched on 2025-01-12.

FAQ

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 236V has 8 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the performance percentile for each processor?

A: The Core 3 201TE sits at the 50th percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 5 236V sits at the 75th percentile with an average benchmark score of 21952.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 236V compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 236V scores 21952 on average. The Core Ultra 5 238V scores 21981 (-0.1 percent), the Intel Core i7-11700F scores 21988 (-0.1 percent), the AMD Ryzen 5 3600X scores 21992 (-0.1 percent), and the AMD EPYC 9534 scores 21900 (+0.2 percent).

Q: What process nodes are used by these processors?

A: The Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 236V uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC.

Q: What is the TDP of each processor?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 watts. The Core Ultra 5 236V has a TDP of 17 watts.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 236V does not support ECC memory.

The Verdict

The data presents an unusual situation. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores, so its performance cannot be compared directly with the Core Ultra 5 236V. The only quantitative comparison available comes from percentile rankings: the Core 3 201TE at the 50th percentile versus the Core Ultra 5 236V at the 75th percentile. This indicates that the Core Ultra 5 236V sits higher in the overall performance distribution.

The Core Ultra 5 236V delivers substantial measured performance across all seventeen recorded benchmarks. Its average score of 21952 places it alongside the Core Ultra 5 238V, Core i7-11700F, and Ryzen 5 3600X within a 0.2 percent band. The processor achieves this with a 17-watt TDP, making it suitable for mobile platforms with constrained thermal budgets.

The Core 3 201TE offers a 45-watt TDP, desktop socket compatibility, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, DDR4 and DDR5 memory support, and ECC functionality. Its 4-core, 8-thread configuration with a 4.60 GHz boost clock targets desktop workloads that do not require the core count of the Core Ultra 5 236V.

The specification differences point to different design goals. The Core Ultra 5 236V uses a 3 nm TSMC process with 8 cores and a 4.70 GHz boost, achieving higher percentiles with lower power. The Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm Intel process with fewer cores but more PCIe lanes and ECC support.

Users seeking maximum measured benchmark performance should consider the Core Ultra 5 236V, as the database contains no performance measurements for the Core 3 201TE. Users requiring ECC memory, desktop socket compatibility, or 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes should consider the Core 3 201TE, as those features are absent from the Core Ultra 5 236V. The market segments confirm this split: desktop for the Core 3 201TE, mobile for the Core Ultra 5 236V.