Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T Comparison

Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 265T

The database records a stark contrast between these two Intel desktop processors. The Intel Core 3 201TE is a 4-core, 8-thread chip built on the Bartlett Lake architecture, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 265T is a 20-core, 20-thread processor from the Arrow Lake-S family. Benchmark data for the Core Ultra 7 265T shows a substantial performance advantage across every recorded metric, placing it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs, whereas the Core 3 201TE sits at the 50th percentile. The measured average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 265T is 47,697, while the Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a decisive performance gap between the two processors. The Core Ultra 7 265T achieves a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 31,558, a result that reflects its 20-core configuration. The Core 3 201TE has no corresponding benchmark entry in the database, so a direct comparison of multi-core scores is not possible from the recorded data. However, the Core Ultra 7 265T also posts a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,455, which indicates strong per-thread performance driven by its 5.30 GHz boost clock.

In Cinebench R20, the Core Ultra 7 265T scores 13,254 in multi-core and 1,871 in single-core tests. The Cinebench R15 results for the same processor are 3,180 multi-core and 449 single-core. These numbers show consistent scaling across different Cinebench versions, with the multi-core scores reflecting the processor's high core count and the single-core scores reflecting its boost frequency.

PassMark results for the Core Ultra 7 265T further demonstrate its capabilities. The processor records a multi-thread score of 37,084 and a single-thread score of 4,338. In specific workload tests, it achieves 370,158 in data compression, 29,687 in data encryption, 28,609 in extended instructions, 129,817 in floating point math, 104,943 in integer math, and 44,400 in random string sorting. The physics test yields a score of 2,391, and the find prime numbers test yields 322.

The Core 3 201TE has no benchmark entries in the database, which means the recorded data does not provide a direct head-to-head comparison. The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 7 265T are all AMD or Intel processors with similar average scores. The AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 scores 47,527, which is 0.4% lower than the Core Ultra 7 265T. The AMD Ryzen 9 7900X3D scores 47,908, which is 0.4% higher. The AMD Ryzen 9 3900 scores 47,918, which is 0.5% higher. The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H scores 47,468, which is 0.5% lower. These narrow deltas indicate that the Core Ultra 7 265T performs in line with these established high-end processors.

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265T has 20 cores and 20 threads.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 265T has a boost clock of 5.30 GHz.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 265T has 30 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 7 265T?

A: The average benchmark score is 47,697, which places it in the 90th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: Does the Core 3 201TE have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database lists no benchmark scores for the Core 3 201TE.

Q: What is the process node for each processor?

A: The Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm process node. The Core Ultra 7 265T uses a 3 nm process node.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 265T is the superior processor by a wide margin. Its 20 cores and 20 threads, combined with a 5.30 GHz boost clock and 30 MB of L3 cache, deliver benchmark scores that place it in the 90th percentile. The recorded Cinebench and PassMark scores all show strong results, and the processor performs within 0.5% of its nearest rivals in the database. The Core 3 201TE, with 4 cores and 8 threads, a 4.60 GHz boost clock, and 12 MB of L3 cache, does not have any recorded benchmark scores, which prevents a direct numerical comparison. Based on the available data, the Core Ultra 7 265T is the clear choice for workloads that demand high multi-threaded performance.

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 265T has 20 cores and 20 threads. The base clock of the Core 3 201TE is 2.90 GHz, whereas the Core Ultra 7 265T has a base clock of 1.50 GHz. Boost clocks are 4.60 GHz for the Core 3 201TE and 5.30 GHz for the Core Ultra 7 265T. Thermal design power is 45 watts for the Core 3 201TE and 35 watts for the Core Ultra 7 265T, despite the latter having five times the cores.

The memory support also differs. The Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 7 265T supports only DDR5. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but memory bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201TE and 102.4 GB/s for the Core Ultra 7 265T. ECC memory support is present on the Core 3 201TE but absent on the Core Ultra 7 265T.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 265T provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 3 201TE and Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU for the Core Ultra 7 265T. The launch MSRP is $134 for the Core 3 201TE and $384 for the Core Ultra 7 265T. The socket types are also different, with the Core 3 201TE using Intel Socket 1700 and the Core Ultra 7 265T using Intel Socket 1851.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between the two processors is substantial. The Core 3 201TE is based on the Bartlett Lake architecture, manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process node. The Core Ultra 7 265T uses the Arrow Lake architecture, specifically Arrow Lake-S, manufactured by TSMC on a 3 nm process node. The die size for the Core 3 201TE is 163 mm², while the Core Ultra 7 265T has a die size of 243 mm². The Core Ultra 7 265T has a recorded transistor count of 17,800 million, whereas the Core 3 201TE has no transistor count listed in the database.

Cache hierarchies differ significantly. The Core 3 201TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, with 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 265T has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core, with 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The generation labels reflect the architectural split, with the Core 3 201TE listed as "Core 3 (Bartlett Lake)" and the Core Ultra 7 265T listed as "Ultra 7 (Arrow Lake)".

The production status is Active for both processors, with release dates of 2025-01-12 for the Core 3 201TE and 2025-01-06 for the Core Ultra 7 265T. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Part numbers are SRPKDQ5CK for the Core 3 201TE and SRQCS for the Core Ultra 7 265T.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 265T wins in every category where recorded data exists. Its 20-core configuration delivers multi-threaded performance that is reflected in the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core scores. The PassMark multi-thread score of 37,084 and the data compression score of 370,158 indicate strong performance in parallel workloads such as rendering, encoding, and data processing. The single-thread scores, including 4,455 in Cinebench R23 and 4,338 in PassMark single-thread, show that the 5.30 GHz boost clock provides excellent per-core performance for applications that rely on single-threaded execution.

The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores, so the database provides no evidence of where it might win. Its lower core count and smaller cache suggest it would be positioned for lighter workloads, but the data does not support any specific performance claims. The higher TDP of 45 watts for the Core 3 201TE compared to 35 watts for the Core Ultra 7 265T is the only metric where the Core 3 201TE exceeds its rival, though this does not translate into a performance advantage in the recorded data.

The Core Ultra 7 265T also holds advantages in memory bandwidth, offering 102.4 GB/s compared to 76.8 GB/s, and in PCIe lane count, with 20 lanes versus 16. The larger L3 cache of 30 MB versus 12 MB further supports its performance in data-intensive workloads. The 3 nm process node and TSMC foundry for the Core Ultra 7 265T represent a more advanced manufacturing technology compared to the 10 nm node used for the Core 3 201TE, which may contribute to its efficiency and performance characteristics.