Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The recorded data shows a complete performance split between these two processors. The Intel Core 3 201TE has no benchmark entries in the database, while the Intel Core Ultra 9 285T has a full suite of scores across Cinebench and Passmark tests. This means every measurable workload category, from single-threaded tasks to heavy multi-threaded rendering, falls to the Core Ultra 9 285T.

The Core Ultra 9 285T delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33573 points, placing it in the 91st percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its single-core R23 result of 4739 points indicates a strong per-thread capability as well. The Core 3 201TE sits at the 50th percentile with no recorded benchmark scores, which limits direct comparison to architectural and specification analysis rather than measured performance data.

Passmark results reinforce the Core Ultra 9 285T dominance. The multi-thread score of 39931, integer math score of 132433, and floating point math score of 137923 all reflect a processor designed for sustained throughput. The data compression score of 384140 and random string sorting score of 47695 show strength in memory-heavy and data-shuffling workloads. The Core 3 201TE offers no comparable figures, so every workload category in the database belongs to the Core Ultra 9 285T.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design generations and manufacturing approaches. The Core 3 201TE uses Bartlett Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, with a die size of 163 mm². The Core Ultra 9 285T uses Arrow Lake-S architecture, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core Ultra 9 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads. The absence of hyper-threading on the Core Ultra 9 285T means each of its 24 cores contributes one thread, but the sheer core count gives it a massive parallel throughput advantage. Cache hierarchies also differ: the Core 3 201TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285T has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Socket compatibility separates the two as well. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 285T uses Intel Socket 1851. Memory support differs: the Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 9 285T supports only DDR5. Both run dual-channel memory, but the Core Ultra 9 285T reaches 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201TE.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Core 3 201TE carries UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 9 285T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. PCIe connectivity is similar in generation but not lane count: both use Gen 5, but the Core 3 201TE provides 16 CPU lanes while the Core Ultra 9 285T provides 20.

Clock speeds show different design philosophies. The Core 3 201TE has a 2.90 GHz base clock and 4.60 GHz boost clock. The Core Ultra 9 285T has a 1.40 GHz base clock and 5.40 GHz boost clock. The much lower base clock on the Core Ultra 9 285T pairs with its 35 W TDP, lower than the 45 W TDP of the Core 3 201TE. This suggests the Core Ultra 9 285T relies on boosting under load rather than sustained high base frequencies.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285T has 24 cores and 24 threads. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Core 3 201TE and the Core Ultra 9 285T have ECC memory support listed in the database.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Core 3 201TE boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the Core Ultra 9 285T boosts to 5.40 GHz.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285T uses a 3 nm process from TSMC, while the Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm process from Intel.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core Ultra 9 285T has 36 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: What are the launch MSRP values?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a launch MSRP of $134, and the Core Ultra 9 285T has a launch MSRP of $549.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the database records.

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201TE | Intel Core Ultra 9 285T |

|---|---|---|

| Series | null | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 4 | 24 |

| Threads | 8 | 24 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) | Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | null | 17,800 million |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 243 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 102.4 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2025-01-06 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | $549 |

| Part Number | SRPKDQ5CK | SRQD3 |

| Percentile Vs All CPUs | 50 | 91 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 0 | 51310 |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no shared benchmark entries between the two processors, so direct head-to-head scores are unavailable. However, the Core Ultra 9 285T has 17 benchmark results, and the Core 3 201TE has none. This absence of data for the Core 3 201TE is itself informative: it indicates the Core Ultra 9 285T has been subjected to standardized testing while the Core 3 201TE has not.

For the Core Ultra 9 285T, the Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 33573 places it well ahead of processors in its own rival group. The nearest rival, the Intel Core i9-14900T, scores 51015 on average, which is 0.6% behind the Core Ultra 9 285T average score of 51310. The Intel Core i9-13900F scores 51730, putting it 0.8% ahead of the Core Ultra 9 285T. The Intel Core i7-13850HX scores 50761, 1.1% behind, and the AMD Ryzen 9 5900XT scores 50718, 1.2% behind.

These rival comparisons show the Core Ultra 9 285T sits in a tightly contested performance band. Its average benchmark score of 51310 is within roughly one percent of each listed rival, meaning small workload variations could shift the ranking. The 91st percentile ranking across all CPUs confirms it belongs near the top of the desktop processor hierarchy.

Passmark single-thread results for the Core Ultra 9 285T show 4576 points, and the Cinebench R20 single-core score is 1990. Multi-threaded workloads show a larger spread: Cinebench R20 multi-core reaches 14100, and Cinebench R15 multi-core reaches 3384. The single-core R15 score of 477 is relatively modest, but the R15 multi-core score of 3384 shows the scaling advantage of 24 cores.

Data-heavy workloads on the Core Ultra 9 285T include a Passmark data encryption score of 32061, extended instructions score of 27477, and a find prime numbers score of 345. Physics simulation scores 2842 in Passmark. These figures collectively describe a processor that handles both integer and floating point workloads with high throughput, consistent with its 24-core configuration.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear separation in intended use cases. The Core 3 201TE, with 4 cores and 8 threads, a 4.60 GHz boost clock, and 45 W TDP, is a compact desktop part on Socket 1700 with support for both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. Its lack of benchmark entries means the database contains no measured performance evidence for it. The 50th percentile ranking reflects its position relative to all CPUs, but without scores, the ranking cannot be tied to specific workload performance.

The Core Ultra 9 285T, with 24 cores, a 5.40 GHz boost clock, 36 MB of L3 cache, and 35 W TDP, delivers measured results across every benchmark category in the database. Its 91st percentile ranking and average benchmark score of 51310 place it among high-end desktop processors, with rival comparisons showing it within one percent of the Core i9-14900T, Core i9-13900F, Core i7-13850HX, and Ryzen 9 5900XT.

For workloads that demand parallel compute, the Core Ultra 9 285T is the only one of the two with recorded evidence of capability. The 33573 Cinebench R23 multi-core score and 39931 Passmark multi-thread score confirm strong scaling across its 24 cores. For lighter workloads, the Core 3 201TE may suffice, but the database offers no measured confirmation. Users requiring DDR4 compatibility on Socket 1700 would look to the Core 3 201TE, while those building on Socket 1851 with DDR5 and seeking top-tier multi-core results would select the Core Ultra 9 285T. The data supports the Core Ultra 9 285T as the higher-performing processor in every benchmark category recorded.