Intel Core 5 221TE vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 221TE records an average benchmark score of 17860, while the Intel Core 7 160UL sits at 14232. The Core 5 221TE also holds a higher percentile ranking at 71 versus 69 for the Core 7 160UL.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-core rendering workloads?

A: In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Core 5 221TE scores 11305 against 9386 for the Core 7 160UL, a 20.4% advantage. The same margin appears across Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core tests, with the Core 5 221TE leading by 20.4% in both.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Core 7 160UL wins?

A: Yes. The Core 7 160UL wins PassMark integer math with 47515 versus 42303, an 11% advantage, and PassMark single-thread tests with 3391 versus 1734, a 48.9% lead. These are the only three wins out of 17 head-to-head tests.

Q: What is the difference in power consumption between the two?

A: The Core 5 221TE has a 45W TDP, while the Core 7 160UL is rated at 15W. The Core 7 160UL uses significantly less power, which is a key differentiator for thermal-constrained systems.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel buses. However, the Core 5 221TE has a recorded memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 7 160UL has no bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes?

A: The Core 5 221TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 7 160UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The Core 5 221TE doubles the lane count and uses a newer PCIe generation.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share a common Intel Socket 1700 platform and a 10 nm process node from Intel's foundry, but the underlying designs diverge significantly. The Core 5 221TE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, listed as generation "Core 5 (Bartlett Lake)", while the Core 7 160UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-PS.

Both chips feature 10 cores, but the thread counts differ: the Core 5 221TE supports 16 threads, while the Core 7 160UL supports 12 threads. This indicates a different core configuration, with the Core 5 221TE having more simultaneous multi-threading capability.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core, and L2 is also the same at 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache, however, is larger on the Core 5 221TE: 24 MB shared versus 12 MB shared on the Core 7 160UL. This doubling of shared cache can influence workloads that benefit from larger pools of fast memory.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 5 221TE uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 7 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The Iris Xe part has more execution units, which typically indicates stronger integrated graphics performance, though the database does not include direct graphics benchmarks for either chip.

ECC memory support is present on the Core 5 221TE but absent on the Core 7 160UL. The PCIe interface also differs: Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Core 5 221TE versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the Core 7 160UL.

The Core 5 221TE has a boost clock of 5.00 GHz, while the Core 7 160UL boosts slightly higher to 5.20 GHz. Base clocks are identical at 1.80 GHz. The Core 5 221TE has a launch MSRP of $232, while the Core 7 160UL has no recorded launch MSRP in the database.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Core 5 221TE for raw performance. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, with margins ranging from 18% to 65.6% across various workloads. Its average benchmark score of 17860 places it roughly in line with the AMD Ryzen 5 3600XT (17891, delta -0.2%) and Intel Core 5 120U (17898, delta -0.2%), while being slightly ahead of the Intel Core 7 350 (17779, delta 0.5%).

The Core 7 160UL, with an average score of 14232, aligns with the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C (14277, delta -0.3%) and Intel Core i5-10400F (14185, delta 0.3%). It is not a weak processor, but it trails the Core 5 221TE by roughly 25% in average benchmark score.

The Core 7 160UL does offer two important advantages. Its 15W TDP versus 45W means it consumes far less power, making it suitable for compact or passively cooled systems. Its single-thread PassMark score of 3391 versus 1734 is a substantial 48.9% lead, and its integer math result of 47515 versus 42303 is an 11% win. These wins suggest that for certain single-threaded or integer-heavy tasks, the Core 7 160UL can outperform its sibling.

However, for users prioritizing multi-core rendering, data compression, encryption, or extended instruction workloads, the Core 5 221TE is the stronger choice based on every Cinebench test and most PassMark tests. The Core 5 221TE also provides more PCIe lanes, ECC support, and a larger L3 cache.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 221TE | Intel Core 7 160UL |

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

| Threads | 16 | 12 |

| Boost Clock | 5.00 GHz | 5.20 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-PS |

| Generation | Core 5 (Bartlett Lake) | Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) |

| L3 Cache | 24 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-04-07 |

| Launch MSRP | $232 | Not recorded |

| Part Number | SRVQS | unknown |

Identical specifications include 10 cores, 1.80 GHz base clock, Intel Socket 1700, 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, desktop market segment, active production status, and locked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 5 221TE dominates the Cinebench suite with remarkable consistency. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1139 versus 946, a 20.4% lead. R15 single-core shows 160 versus 133, a 20.3% margin. R20 multi-core delivers 4748 versus 3942, another 20.4% gap, while R20 single-core is 670 versus 556, a 20.5% difference. R23 multi-core follows the same pattern: 11305 versus 9386, 20.4% ahead. R23 single-core rounds out the Cinebench results at 1596 versus 1325, a 20.5% margin.

PassMark results show a wider spread. Data compression favors the Core 5 221TE heavily: 156682 versus 108953, a 43.8% advantage. Data encryption shows 8963 versus 7146, a 25.4% lead. Extended instructions produce the largest gap of the entire comparison: 9655 versus 5832, a 65.6% margin. Find prime numbers is closer at 59 versus 50, an 18% win. Floating point math delivers 31661 versus 25670, a 23.3% edge. Multithread performance is 13301 versus 11043, a 20.4% lead. Physics tests show 977 versus 819, a 19.3% difference. Random string sorting gives 16929 versus 11843, a 42.9% win.

The Core 7 160UL claims three victories. Integer math favors it at 47515 versus 42303, an 11% lead. Single-thread and singlethread PassMark results both show 3391 versus 1734, a 48.9% advantage. These wins indicate that the Core 7 160UL has a distinct strength in integer-heavy and single-threaded workloads, despite losing the broader benchmark battle.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 221TE wins in every multi-core rendering scenario. All three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) show roughly 20% advantages in both single-core and multi-core tests. This makes it the clear choice for video rendering, 3D modeling, and other threaded workloads that rely on sustained CPU throughput.

The Core 5 221TE also dominates data-centric tasks. Data compression performance is 43.8% higher, random string sorting is 42.9% higher, and extended instructions are 65.6% higher. Data encryption shows a 25.4% lead. These results suggest strong suitability for database operations, compression tools, and cryptographic workloads.

Floating point math and physics simulations favor the Core 5 221TE as well, with 23.3% and 19.3% leads respectively. Multithread performance is 20.4% higher, reinforcing its position for parallel processing.

The Core 7 160UL wins specifically in integer math, where it outperforms by 11%. This could matter for workloads like integer-heavy code compilation or certain financial calculations. Its single-thread PassMark score of 3391 versus 1734 is a 48.9% margin, indicating exceptional per-thread performance despite lower overall power draw.

The Core 7 160UL also has a significant power advantage with a 15W TDP versus 45W. This makes it suitable for systems where thermal output is a primary constraint, such as small form factor desktops or fanless designs. Its integrated Iris Xe Graphics 96EU also provides more execution units than the UHD Graphics 730, though no direct graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database.

For users who need maximum multi-core performance, PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, ECC memory support, and a larger L3 cache, the Core 5 221TE is the data-backed choice. For users who prioritize low power consumption, strong single-thread integer performance, and a more capable integrated GPU, the Core 7 160UL offers distinct advantages.