Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 366H Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents two distinctly different Intel processors with almost no overlap in intended use. The Intel Core 3 201TE is a desktop part with 4 cores and 8 threads, a 45 W TDP, and a launch MSRP of $134, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 366H is a mobile processor with 16 cores and 16 threads, a 25 W TDP, and no recorded launch MSRP. Benchmark results only exist for the Core Ultra 7 366H, which sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 41,263. The Core 3 201TE has no benchmark entries and a 50th percentile ranking, meaning the database contains no measured performance data for it. Based strictly on available measurements, the Core Ultra 7 366H is the only one of the two with verified performance, and its data shows it is competitive with high-end desktop processors from a prior generation. The Core 3 201TE, lacking any benchmark scores, cannot be compared numerically. The Ultra 7 366H is the clear choice for any workload where measured performance matters, while the Core 3 201TE is a desktop entry-level part whose capabilities are unverified in this database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use different manufacturing processes. The Core 3 201TE is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry, uses the Bartlett Lake codename, and belongs to the Core 3 generation. It fits the Intel Socket 1700 and has a die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra 7 366H uses the Panther Lake architecture, is built on a 3 nm process node, also at Intel's foundry, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3 generation with the Panther Lake-H codename. It uses the Intel BGA 2540 socket, and its die size is not recorded in the database.

The core configurations differ substantially. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating hyper-threading support, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads, meaning it does not use simultaneous multithreading. Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 3 201TE has 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 7 366H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 2.5 MB of L2 cache per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra 7 therefore has more than double the per-core L1 and L2 cache and 50% more shared L3 cache.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, and it supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in dual-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, and it does not support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 3 201TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 7 366H provides Gen 5 with 12 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are different as well: the Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics. Clock speeds show a mixed picture: the Core 3 201TE has a 2.90 GHz base clock and a 4.60 GHz boost clock, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has a 2.00 GHz base clock and a 4.80 GHz boost clock. The Ultra 7 has a lower base clock but a higher boost clock. TDP ratings go in opposite directions: the Core 3 201TE is rated at 45 W, while the Core Ultra 7 366H is rated at 25 W, making the mobile part more power-efficient on paper despite having four times the cores.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries comparing these two processors directly. However, the Core Ultra 7 366H has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, while the Core 3 201TE has none. This absence of data for the Core 3 201TE means every measured comparison is one-sided.

The Core Ultra 7 366H delivers strong multi-core results. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2,870 points. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 11,960 points. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 28,477 points. Single-core results are also recorded: 405 in Cinebench R15 single-core, 1,688 in Cinebench R20 single-core, and 4,020 in Cinebench R23 single-core. PassMark tests show a broad spread of capabilities. The multi-thread score is 33,429, and the single-thread score is 4,043. Integer math scores 83,695, floating point math scores 103,615, and extended instructions score 26,901. Data compression scores 327,455, data encryption scores 25,845, and random string sorting scores 39,814. Physics scores 2,880, and finding prime numbers scores 326.

Relative to its nearest rivals in the database, the Core Ultra 7 366H is essentially tied with the Intel Core Ultra 7 356H, which has an average score of 41,215 and a delta of 0.1%. It is also tied with the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 440, which has an average score of 41,208 and a delta of 0.1%. The AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, a desktop part, has an average score of 41,376 and a delta of -0.3%, meaning the Ultra 7 366H trails it by 0.3%. The Intel Core Ultra X7 358H has an average score of 40,967 and a delta of 0.7%, meaning the Ultra 7 366H leads it by 0.7%. These deltas are all within 1%, indicating that the Core Ultra 7 366H performs at the same level as these four rivals despite being a mobile processor. The lack of any benchmark data for the Core 3 201TE prevents any numerical comparison between the two processors in this section.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 201TE have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Core 3 201TE has an empty benchmarks array and an average benchmark score of 0. The Core Ultra 7 366H has 17 recorded benchmark scores.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores and 16 threads. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 W, while the Core Ultra 7 366H has a TDP of 25 W.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 366H does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of each processor?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 366H has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 366H compare to the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 7 366H has an average score of 41,263, while the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X has an average score of 41,376, a delta of -0.3% in favor of the Ryzen 9 5900X.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 366H wins in every measured category because it is the only processor in this comparison with recorded benchmark data. Its multi-core performance is strong, as shown by the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 28,477 and the PassMark multi-thread score of 33,429. Its single-core performance is also solid, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 4,020 and a PassMark single-thread score of 4,043. The data shows the Ultra 7 366H matches the performance of desktop-class rivals like the AMD Ryzen 9 5900X, trailing by only 0.3%, while doing so at a 25 W TDP. This makes it the better choice for any workload where measured performance is the deciding factor. The higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s also gives it an advantage in memory-bound tasks compared to the Core 3 201TE's 76.8 GB/s. The larger cache hierarchy, with 18 MB of shared L3 cache versus 12 MB, further supports demanding applications.

The Core 3 201TE wins in areas that are not performance-related. It is a desktop processor with a Socket 1700, making it suitable for systems that require a socketed, replaceable CPU. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which provides flexibility for builds using older or newer memory standards. It supports ECC memory, which is important for error-sensitive workloads. It offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, four more than the Ultra 7 366H's 12 lanes, which could benefit configurations needing additional high-bandwidth expansion. It has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, which could help in lightly threaded tasks that rely on base frequency, though the Ultra 7's boost clock of 4.80 GHz exceeds the Core 3's 4.60 GHz. The Core 3 201TE also has a recorded launch MSRP of $134, while the Ultra 7 has no recorded price. The Core 3 201TE is the only choice for a desktop socket 1700 platform, while the Ultra 7 366H is the only choice for a mobile BGA 2540 platform.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications:

• Cores: Core 3 201TE has 4 cores; Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 cores.
• Threads: Core 3 201TE has 8 threads; Core Ultra 7 366H has 16 threads.
• Base Clock: Core 3 201TE has 2.90 GHz; Core Ultra 7 366H has 2.00 GHz.
• Boost Clock: Core 3 201TE has 4.60 GHz; Core Ultra 7 366H has 4.80 GHz.
• TDP: Core 3 201TE is 45 W; Core Ultra 7 366H is 25 W.
• Socket: Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700; Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel BGA 2540.
• Codename: Core 3 201TE uses Bartlett Lake; Core Ultra 7 366H uses Panther Lake.
• Generation: Core 3 201TE is Core 3 (Bartlett Lake); Core Ultra 7 366H is Ultra 7 (Panther Lake-H).
• Process Node: Core 3 201TE is 10 nm; Core Ultra 7 366H is 3 nm.
• Die Size: Core 3 201TE is 163 mm²; Core Ultra 7 366H is not recorded.
• L1 Cache: Core 3 201TE has 80 KB per core; Core Ultra 7 366H has 192 KB per core.
• L2 Cache: Core 3 201TE has 1.25 MB per core; Core Ultra 7 366H has 2.5 MB per core.
• L3 Cache: Core 3 201TE has 12 MB shared; Core Ultra 7 366H has 18 MB shared.
• Memory Support: Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5; Core Ultra 7 366H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.
• Memory Bandwidth: Core 3 201TE is 76.8 GB/s; Core Ultra 7 366H is 115.2 GB/s.
• ECC Memory: Core 3 201TE supports ECC; Core Ultra 7 366H does not.
• PCIe Lanes: Core 3 201TE has Gen 5, 16 lanes (CPU only); Core Ultra 7 366H has Gen 5, 12 lanes (CPU only).
• Integrated Graphics: Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730; Core Ultra 7 366H uses Intel Xe3 Graphics.
• Market Segment: Core 3 201TE is Desktop; Core Ultra 7 366H is Mobile.
• Launch MSRP: Core 3 201TE is $134; Core Ultra 7 366H is not recorded.
• Part Number: Core 3 201TE is SRPKDQ5CK; Core Ultra 7 366H is SA4R9Q9EL.