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

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts compare between the Intel Core 3 201TE and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads. The Ultra 7 uses a design where each core has one thread, whereas the Core 3 uses Hyper-Threading to reach 8 threads from 4 cores.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The Core Ultra 7 255HX reaches a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, which is higher than the Core 3 201TE's 4.60 GHz boost. The base clocks are closer, with the Core 3 at 2.90 GHz and the Ultra 7 at 2.40 GHz.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 7 255HX has 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 also has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 255HX does not support ECC memory.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 255HX supports DDR5 only. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 255HX has an average benchmark score of 62,738, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 201TE has an average benchmark score of 0 with a 50th percentile ranking, and no benchmark results are recorded in the database for it.

The Verdict

The data shows a decisive performance gap between these two processors. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255HX is a high-end mobile part with 20 cores, 30 MB of L3 cache, a 5.20 GHz boost clock, and an average benchmark score of 62,738, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. It competes directly with AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 (0.2% behind), AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 (0.4% ahead), Intel Core i7-13790F (0.5% ahead), and Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX (0.7% ahead), based on average scores.

The Intel Core 3 201TE is an entry-level desktop part with 4 cores, 12 MB of L3 cache, and a 4.60 GHz boost clock. It has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, so its performance cannot be quantified against the Ultra 7. Its 50th percentile ranking indicates it sits in the middle of the CPU distribution, but without scores, direct comparison is impossible.

For anyone selecting a processor strictly from recorded data, the Core Ultra 7 255HX is the clear choice for multi-threaded workloads, heavy computation, and modern gaming. The Core 3 201TE is suitable for basic desktop tasks, low-power builds, or systems requiring ECC memory support. It also supports DDR4, which can be a practical advantage in existing systems. The Core 3 201TE has a launch MSRP of $134, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch price.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains benchmark results for the Core Ultra 7 255HX across multiple test suites. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores, so all comparisons rely on the Ultra 7's absolute numbers and its positioning against nearest rivals.

In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core Ultra 7 255HX scores 32,612 points. This is a strong result for a mobile processor, indicating sustained multi-threaded performance. Its single-core score of 2,163 in the same test is also solid. In Cinebench R20, the Ultra 7 scores 17,187 multi-core and 2,426 single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 4,916 multi-core and 327 single-core. These progressive scores confirm consistent scaling across workloads.

PassMark results further characterize the Ultra 7. It scores 48,234 in multithreaded tests, 4,562 in single-thread tests, and 127,126 in integer math. Floating-point math scores 160,624, while extended instructions score 41,247. Data compression scores 515,143, and data encryption scores 39,499. Random string sorting scores 62,591, physics scores 2,926, and finding prime numbers scores 400.

The nearest rival data places the Ultra 7's average score of 62,738 within 1% of several comparable processors. The AMD Ryzen AI Embedded P185 averages 62,839, a 0.2% margin. The AMD Ryzen AI 9 PRO 465 averages 62,498, which is 0.4% lower. The Intel Core i7-13790F averages 63,080, 0.5% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265HX averages 63,173, 0.7% higher. These small deltas indicate that the 255HX performs at the top tier of its class, with no rival exceeding it by more than 0.7%.

Because the Core 3 201TE has no benchmark entries, the head-to-head section cannot show any wins for it. All recorded performance data belongs to the Ultra 7.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255HX has 20 cores and 20 threads. Base clocks are 2.90 GHz for the Core 3 and 2.40 GHz for the Ultra 7. Boost clocks are 4.60 GHz and 5.20 GHz, respectively.

Thermal design power differs as well: the Core 3 is rated at 45 W, while the Ultra 7 is rated at 55 W. The Core 3 uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket, while the Ultra 7 uses Intel BGA 2114, a mobile ball-grid array. The Core 3's market segment is Desktop; the Ultra 7's is Mobile.

Memory support diverges: the Core 3 supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory, but memory bandwidth differs substantially. The Core 3 has 76.8 GB/s, while the Ultra 7 has 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Core 3 but not on the Ultra 7.

PCIe lanes also differ. The Core 3 provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra 7 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are different: the Core 3 uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Ultra 7 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The multiplier is locked on the Core 3 and unlocked on the Ultra 7. The Core 3 has a launch MSRP of $134; the Ultra 7 has no recorded launch MSRP. Part numbers are SRPKDQ5CK for the Core 3 and SRVFG for the Ultra 7.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 201TE is based on Bartlett Lake, a 10 nm Intel process. The Ultra 7 255HX is based on Arrow Lake-HX, a 3 nm process from TSMC. This process difference is significant: the Ultra 7 uses a more advanced node, which helps explain its higher core count and higher boost clock within a similar power envelope.

The Ultra 7 has 17,800 million transistors on a die size of 243 mm². The Core 3's transistor count is not recorded, but its die size is 163 mm². The Ultra 7's larger die accommodates 20 cores and 30 MB of L3 cache, while the Core 3's smaller die holds 4 cores and 12 MB of L3 cache.

Cache hierarchies differ per core. The Core 3 has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The Ultra 7 has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. Shared L3 is 12 MB on the Core 3 and 30 MB on the Ultra 7.

The architecture names reflect different design goals. Bartlett Lake is a desktop-oriented architecture with a modest core count and lower power. Arrow Lake-HX is a high-end mobile architecture designed for performance laptops, with many cores, a high boost clock, and a large cache. The foundry difference (Intel for the Core 3, TSMC for the Ultra 7) is a key architectural distinction.

The Ultra 7's integrated graphics, Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU, are more capable than the Core 3's UHD Graphics 730, based on the product positioning. The Ultra 7 also has an unlocked multiplier, enabling overclocking on supported mobile platforms, while the Core 3's multiplier is locked.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 255HX wins in every recorded benchmark category. Its 20 cores and 20 threads deliver massive multi-threaded performance: Cinebench R23 multi-core at 32,612, PassMark multithreaded at 48,234, and integer math at 127,126. These results make it the obvious choice for rendering, video encoding, scientific computation, and any workload that scales across many cores.

The Ultra 7 also wins in single-threaded performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 2,163 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4,562. Its 5.20 GHz boost clock and 3 nm process contribute to these results. For gaming, where single-core performance often matters most, the Ultra 7 has the advantage. Its average score of 62,738 places it in the 93rd percentile, and its nearest rivals are all within 0.7%, confirming it sits at the top of the mobile processor tier.

The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark wins. Its strengths are qualitative: it supports ECC memory, which the Ultra 7 does not. It supports DDR4, which can lower system cost in existing desktop builds. It uses a standard desktop socket (Intel Socket 1700), making it easy to install in a wide range of motherboards. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the Ultra 7's 55 W, which may appeal to compact desktop systems.

For users who need ECC memory, the Core 3 is the only choice between these two. For users building a low-power desktop with DDR4, the Core 3 fits. For anyone who needs maximum performance, modern architecture, high bandwidth, or a large cache, the Core Ultra 7 255HX is the processor the data supports.

The database shows no scenario where the Core 3 outperforms the Ultra 7 in measured performance. The Core 3's advantages are compatibility and specific features, not speed. The Ultra 7's advantages are overwhelming in every recorded benchmark and in architectural capability.