Intel Core 5 315 vs Intel Core 7 251TE Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data presents a clear performance hierarchy: the Intel Core 7 251TE wins 15 of 17 head-to-head benchmarks, while the Intel Core 5 315 wins only 2. The Core 7 251TE delivers substantially higher scores across nearly every workload category, with its largest advantage in PassMark integer math, where it scores 125,739 versus 31,690, a 74.8% delta. The Core 5 315's only victories come in PassMark single-thread tests, where its score of 4,021 beats the Core 7 251TE's 3,568 by 12.7%.

The Core 7 251TE targets desktop workloads that benefit from massive parallel throughput. Its 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with 36 MB of shared L3 cache, produce an average benchmark score of 41,650, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 315, with 6 cores and 6 threads, achieves an average score of 18,188, landing in the 72nd percentile. The Core 7 251TE sits within 0.6% of the Intel Core i7-14700T and within 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-12850HX in average score, while the Core 5 315 matches the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700 almost exactly.

For users requiring heavy multi-threaded computation, the Core 7 251TE is the clear choice based on benchmark data. The Core 5 315, despite its lower core count, holds a single-thread advantage that may benefit lightly threaded applications. The data also shows the Core 5 315 carries the lower launch MSRP at $340, while the Core 7 251TE launched at $384, though the performance gap in multi-core tests far exceeds the price difference. The Core 7 251TE is the stronger processor for nearly all measured workloads, with the Core 5 315 winning only in raw single-thread PassMark tests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE records an average benchmark score of 41,650, while the Intel Core 5 315 records 18,188. The Core 7 251TE also holds the 88th percentile ranking among all CPUs, compared to the 72nd percentile for the Core 5 315.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE scores 25,518 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 5 315 scores 12,981. The delta is 49.1%, with the Core 7 251TE winning.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Intel Core 5 315 wins?

A: Yes, the Core 5 315 wins both PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4,021 versus 3,568 for the Core 7 251TE, a 12.7% advantage. These are the only two wins for the Core 5 315 out of 17 head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What memory configurations do the two processors support?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory with a single-channel bus and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: Do the processors use different sockets?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516, while the Intel Core 7 251TE uses Intel Socket 1700. The Core 5 315 is a mobile segment part, and the Core 7 251TE is a desktop segment part.

Q: What are the core and thread counts?

A: The Intel Core 5 315 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel product lines and fabrication nodes. The Intel Core 5 315 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and is built on a 3 nm process node. The Intel Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process node. Both are produced by Intel's own foundry.

The Core 5 315 features 6 cores and 6 threads with no hyperthreading. Its cache hierarchy includes 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 251TE features 24 cores and 32 threads. Its L1 cache is listed at 80 KB per core, L2 cache at 1.25 MB per core, and L3 cache at 36 MB shared. The Core 7 251TE also has a die size of 215 mm², while the Core 5 315 has no recorded die size.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores, while the Core 7 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770. The Core 5 315 supports PCIe Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes, whereas the Core 7 251TE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. ECC memory is supported on the Core 7 251TE but not on the Core 5 315.

The Core 5 315 is designated as a mobile processor, while the Core 7 251TE is a desktop processor. Their release dates also differ: the Core 5 315 records a release date of 2026-04-15, and the Core 7 251TE records 2025-01-12. Both processors have locked multipliers and active production status.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 5 315 | Intel Core 7 251TE |

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

| Cores | 6 | 24 |

| Threads | 6 | 32 |

| Base clock | 1.50 GHz | 1.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.40 GHz | 5.40 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1516 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Process node | 3 nm | 10 nm |

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

| L2 cache | 2.5 MB | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR5, LPDDR5X | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bus | Single-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | 59.7 GB/s | 89.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) | UHD Graphics 770 |

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Launch MSRP | $340 | $384 |

| Part number | SAEFC | SRQAXQ5ZG |

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 7 251TE dominates the Core 5 315 in every Cinebench test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Core 7 251TE scores 2,572 versus 1,308, a 49.1% delta. In R15 single-core, it scores 362 versus 184, also 49.2% behind for the Core 5 315. The R20 tests show the same pattern: multi-core 10,717 versus 5,452 and single-core 1,512 versus 769, both with 49.1% deltas. Cinebench R23 follows suit with multi-core 25,518 versus 12,981 and single-core 3,602 versus 1,832, again a 49.1% gap.

PassMark results show an even wider spread in some workloads. Data compression favors the Core 7 251TE at 334,399 versus 146,143, a 56.3% delta. Data encryption shows 22,176 versus 11,119, a 49.9% delta. Extended instructions produce a closer margin: 16,974 versus 13,143, a 22.6% delta. Find prime numbers scores 140 versus 112, a 20% delta. Floating point math records 85,607 versus 42,441, a 50.4% delta. Integer math delivers the largest gap at 125,739 versus 31,690, a 74.8% delta. Multithread scores 30,022 versus 15,272, a 49.1% delta. Physics scores 1,938 versus 1,163, a 40% delta. Random string sorting records 39,643 versus 17,551, a 55.7% delta.

The Core 5 315's only wins come in PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests, both scoring 4,021 against the Core 7 251TE's 3,568, a 12.7% advantage. The database shows the Core 5 315 has a higher single-thread PassMark score despite having a lower boost clock of 4.40 GHz versus 5.40 GHz on the Core 7 251TE. This suggests the architecture and process node differences play a role in single-thread efficiency.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 251TE wins decisively in multi-threaded and parallel workloads. Its 24 cores and 32 threads give it a massive advantage in integer math, where its score of 125,739 nearly quadruples the Core 5 315's 31,690. Data compression also favors the Core 7 251TE heavily, with 334,399 versus 146,143. Floating point math shows a similar pattern at 85,607 versus 42,441. All Cinebench multi-core and single-core tests go to the Core 7 251TE, including R23 multi-core at 25,518 versus 12,981.

The Core 7 251TE also wins in memory bandwidth, with dual-channel support providing 89.6 GB/s versus the Core 5 315's single-channel 59.7 GB/s. It supports ECC memory and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, which suits desktop workstation tasks. Its 36 MB of shared L3 cache provides a large pool for frequently accessed data.

The Core 5 315 wins specifically in PassMark single-thread tests, scoring 4,021 versus 3,568. This 12.7% advantage indicates that lightly threaded applications may run better on the Core 5 315 despite its lower core count. Its 3 nm process node and Wildcat Lake architecture likely contribute to this single-thread efficiency. The Core 5 315 also carries a lower TDP of 15 W versus 45 W, making it suitable for power-constrained mobile designs. Its integrated Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores may serve entry-level graphics tasks, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded in the data.

For users running heavily parallel workloads, the Core 7 251TE is the superior choice based on the recorded benchmark scores. For users whose primary tasks are single-threaded and who prioritize the mobile form factor with lower power consumption, the Core 5 315 holds a measurable advantage in PassMark single-thread performance. The data does not support the Core 5 315 as a general-purpose winner against the Core 7 251TE, given the latter's 15 benchmark wins.