Intel Core 7 160UL vs Intel Core 7 251TE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher multi-core performance in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE is substantially ahead, scoring 25518 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 9386 for the Intel Core 7 160UL, a 63.2% lead for the 251TE.

Q: What is the difference in single-thread performance between the two?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with 3602 points against 1325 for the 160UL. In Passmark single-thread tests, the gap narrows to 3568 versus 3391, a 5% advantage for the 251TE.

Q: How does the 160UL compare to other CPUs in the database?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL sits at the 69th percentile of all CPUs with an average benchmark score of 14232. Its nearest rival, the AMD Ryzen 3 7320C, scores 14277, which is 0.3% higher.

Q: Where does the 251TE rank among all CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE reaches the 88th percentile with an average benchmark score of 41650. Its closest competitor, the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H, scores 41621, or 0.1% lower.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What memory bandwidth is supported by each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE supports 89.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The database does not list a memory bandwidth figure for the Intel Core 7 160UL.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 160UL is built on the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, while the Intel Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename. Both processors are fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel and use the Intel Socket 1700.

The core configuration differs sharply. The 160UL provides 10 cores and 12 threads, whereas the 251TE offers 24 cores and 32 threads. Both share the same per-core L1 cache at 80 KB and per-core L2 cache at 1.25 MB, but the shared L3 cache is much larger on the 251TE at 36 MB versus 12 MB on the 160UL.

The 160UL has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz. The 251TE has a lower base clock of 1.40 GHz but a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Thermal design power differs significantly: the 160UL is rated at 15 W, while the 251TE is rated at 45 W.

The integrated graphics also differ. The 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units, while the 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770. The 251TE supports ECC memory, which the 160UL does not. The 251TE offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the 160UL offers PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. The 251TE has a die size of 215 mm², whereas no die size is recorded for the 160UL.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins every recorded benchmark in the head-to-head comparison. The largest margins come in the Passmark suite. In random string sorting, the 251TE scores 39643 against 11843 for the 160UL, a 70.1% advantage. Floating point math shows a 70% gap, with the 251TE at 85607 and the 160UL at 25670. Data encryption favors the 251TE by 67.8% (22176 versus 7146), and data compression favors it by 67.4% (334399 versus 108953). Extended instructions show a 65.6% gap (16974 versus 5832), and find prime numbers shows a 64.3% gap (140 versus 50).

The Cinebench results are consistent across the board. For multi-core tests, the 251TE leads by 63.2% in Cinebench R15 (2572 versus 946), Cinebench R20 (10717 versus 3942), and Cinebench R23 (25518 versus 9386). Single-core Cinebench results show the same 63.2% to 63.3% gap: R15 single-core is 362 versus 133, R20 single-core is 1512 versus 556, and R23 single-core is 3602 versus 1325.

The Passmark multi-thread score favors the 251TE by 63.2% (30022 versus 11043), and the physics score favors it by 57.7% (1938 versus 819). Integer math shows a 62.2% gap (125739 versus 47515). The narrowest margin is in Passmark single-thread, where the 251TE leads by only 5% (3568 versus 3391).

The data indicates that the 251TE dominates in every workload category, but the degree of dominance varies. The smallest difference appears in single-threaded Passmark tests, while the largest appears in sorting and floating point workloads.

The Verdict

The Intel Core 7 251TE is the clear performance winner across all recorded benchmarks. Its average benchmark score of 41650 places it at the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 7 160UL averages 14232 and sits at the 69th percentile. The 251TE delivers roughly 2.9 times the average score of the 160UL, a gap that reflects its 24 cores versus 10, its 36 MB L3 cache versus 12 MB, and its higher 45 W TDP versus 15 W.

The 160UL does retain a role. Its 15 W TDP and lower core count suggest a much lower power envelope, and its design targets a class of desktop systems where power draw is the primary constraint. The 251TE, with its larger cache, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and significantly higher multi-threaded output, targets workloads that demand sustained throughput.

The head-to-head data leaves no ambiguity: the 251TE wins 17 out of 17 recorded comparisons. The only area where the 160UL approaches parity is Passmark single-thread performance, where the 5% gap is the smallest of any test. For any workload that can use multiple cores, the 251TE is the superior choice.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specifications. The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are 1.40 GHz for the 251TE and 1.80 GHz for the 160UL. Boost clocks are 5.40 GHz for the 251TE and 5.20 GHz for the 160UL. TDP is 45 W for the 251TE and 15 W for the 160UL.

L3 cache is 36 MB on the 251TE and 12 MB on the 160UL. The 251TE supports ECC memory; the 160UL does not. The 251TE has 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, while no figure is recorded for the 160UL. PCIe connectivity is Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the 251TE and Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the 160UL. The 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the 160UL uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The 251TE has a die size of 215 mm², while no die size is recorded for the 160UL.

The 251TE launched with a launch MSRP of $384. The 160UL has no launch MSRP recorded. The 251TE has a recorded part number of SRQAXQ5ZG, while the 160UL's part number is unknown. Both processors are actively in production, use the Intel Socket 1700, and support DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins every recorded benchmark, so the practical question is where the 160UL remains viable. The 160UL has a 15 W TDP, which is one-third of the 251TE's 45 W rating. For systems constrained by power delivery or thermal limits, the 160UL offers a functional path with a boost clock of 5.20 GHz and a base clock of 1.80 GHz.

The 251TE is the choice for multi-threaded throughput. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25518 is 2.7 times the 160UL's 9386. Its Passmark data compression score of 334399 is more than three times the 160UL's 108953. Its floating point math score of 85607 is more than three times the 160UL's 25670. The 251TE also carries ECC memory support and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, features that suit server-adjacent or reliability-focused desktop builds.

The 160UL's closest competitive position is in single-threaded Passmark work, where it trails by only 5%. That margin is small enough that the 160UL can handle lightly threaded tasks without a major penalty. However, even in single-core Cinebench tests, the 251TE leads by roughly 63%, so the 160UL's single-thread advantage is limited to the specific Passmark measurement.

The specification split supports a clear division: the 160UL is a low-power desktop part with a modest core count and a high boost clock, while the 251TE is a high-core-count, high-power part with a larger cache, ECC support, and faster PCIe connectivity. The recorded data confirms the 251TE as the dominant performer, with the 160UL serving only the narrow power-sensitive segment.