Intel Core 7 240H vs Intel Core 7 253PQE Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H records an average benchmark score of 31,483, placing it in the 82nd percentile among all CPUs. The Intel Core 7 253PQE records an average score of 55,919, which places it in the 91st percentile.

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE has 20 threads, while the Intel Core 7 240H has 16 threads. Both processors have 10 cores.

Q: What is the difference in boost clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core 7 253PQE reaches 5.70 GHz.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 7 240H does not.

Q: How do the integrated graphics differ?

A: The Intel Core 7 240H uses Iris Xe Graphics with 64 execution units. The Intel Core 7 253PQE uses UHD Graphics 770.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin between the two?

A: The largest margin appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Intel Core 7 253PQE scores 4,431 versus 1,719 for the Intel Core 7 240H, a difference of 61.2% in favor of the 253PQE.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 10 nm process node and are both manufactured by Intel, but they diverge in architecture and target platform. The Intel Core 7 240H belongs to the Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-H and falls under the Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh) generation. It is built for the mobile segment and uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket. The Intel Core 7 253PQE carries the Bartlett Lake codename, belongs to the Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) generation, and targets the desktop segment with the Intel Socket 1700.

Cache configurations differ noticeably. Both processors list 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache, however, is larger on the 253PQE: 33 MB shared versus 24 MB shared on the 240H. That additional 9 MB of shared L3 cache gives the desktop part more room for frequently accessed data across all cores.

Memory support is similar on the surface, as both support DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory buses. The 253PQE additionally lists a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, a figure not recorded for the 240H. The 253PQE also supports ECC memory, which the 240H does not. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the 240H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 253PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

Integrated graphics differ between the two parts. The 240H ships with Iris Xe Graphics 64EU, while the 253PQE ships with UHD Graphics 770. The 253PQE has a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 2.50 GHz on the 240H, and a higher boost clock of 5.70 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. The thermal design power also differs substantially: the 240H is rated at 45 W, while the 253PQE is rated at 125 W.

Release timing places the 240H earlier, with a release date in December 2024, while the 253PQE arrived in March 2026. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The recorded head-to-head data shows a clean sweep: the Intel Core 7 253PQE wins all 17 benchmark comparisons, with the Intel Core 7 240H recording zero wins. There is no workload category in the database where the 240H comes out ahead.

The 253PQE performs best relative to the 240H in single-threaded rendering tasks. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the largest gap at 61.2%, and Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 44.2% gap. These results indicate that the 253PQE has a decisive advantage in lightly threaded workloads that depend on clock speed and per-core efficiency.

The margins narrow in certain PassMark tests. The smallest advantage for the 253PQE is in PassMark single-thread, where it leads by 13.8%. This suggests that in some single-threaded integer workloads, the 240H is comparatively closer to the 253PQE, though still behind.

For multi-threaded and data-intensive tasks, the 253PQE maintains a consistent lead of roughly 40% to 50%. Data compression shows a 44.2% advantage, integer math shows 41.7%, and multithread shows 42.4%. The 253PQE is therefore the stronger choice for parallel workloads such as rendering, compression, and encryption, while the 240H offers no recorded category where it takes the lead.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several specification fields. Core count is identical at 10 cores, but thread count differs: the 240H has 16 threads, while the 253PQE has 20 threads. Base clock differs, with the 240H at 2.50 GHz and the 253PQE at 3.50 GHz. Boost clock differs, with the 240H at 5.20 GHz and the 253PQE at 5.70 GHz.

TDP differs significantly: the 240H is rated at 45 W, while the 253PQE is rated at 125 W. Socket types differ: the 240H uses Intel BGA 1744, while the 253PQE uses Intel Socket 1700. Architecture and codename differ, with the 240H on Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake-H, and the 253PQE on Bartlett Lake.

Generation labels differ as well: the 240H is listed as Core 7 (Raptor Lake Refresh), while the 253PQE is listed as Core 7 (Bartlett Lake). L3 cache differs: 24 MB shared on the 240H versus 33 MB shared on the 253PQE. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for the 253PQE at 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory support differs: not supported on the 240H, supported on the 253PQE.

PCIe lanes differ: the 240H has 8 lanes (CPU only), while the 253PQE has 16 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics 64EU on the 240H versus UHD Graphics 770 on the 253PQE. Market segment differs: Mobile for the 240H, Desktop for the 253PQE. Release dates differ, with the 240H in December 2024 and the 253PQE in March 2026. Launch MSRP differs: the 240H is listed at $502, while the 253PQE is listed at $409.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head benchmark table shows that the Intel Core 7 253PQE wins every recorded comparison. The largest single margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the 253PQE scores 4,431 against 1,719 for the 240H, a 61.2% advantage. Cinebench R23 multicore also shows a large gap: the 253PQE scores 31,390 versus 15,764, a 49.8% advantage.

In Cinebench R15, the 253PQE leads multicore with 3,163 versus 2,360, a 25.4% margin, and single-core with 446 versus 249, a 44.2% margin. Cinebench R20 shows the 253PQE ahead in multicore with 13,183 versus 8,562, a 35.1% margin, and in single-core with 1,861 versus 1,208, also a 35.1% margin.

PassMark tests follow the same pattern. Data compression shows the 253PQE at 487,335 versus 271,774, a 44.2% advantage. Data encryption shows 25,515 versus 15,155, a 40.6% advantage. Extended instructions show 32,390 versus 16,897, a 47.8% advantage. Find prime numbers shows 206 versus 102, a 50.5% advantage.

Floating point math shows 105,279 versus 58,905, a 44% advantage. Integer math shows 137,795 versus 80,396, a 41.7% advantage. PassMark multithread shows 41,656 versus 23,975, a 42.4% advantage. Physics shows 2,970 versus 1,723, a 42% advantage. Random string sorting shows 54,222 versus 28,866, a 46.8% advantage.

The narrowest margin is in PassMark single-thread, where the 253PQE scores 4,389 versus 3,782, a 13.8% advantage. This is the only test where the 253PQE leads by less than 20%. Every other test shows a margin of at least 25%.

The average benchmark score difference reinforces these results. The 253PQE averages 55,919, which is about 77.6% higher than the 240H average of 31,483. The nearest rivals for the 240H include the Intel Core Ultra 3 205 at 31,473 and the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX at 31,495, both within 0% delta. The nearest rivals for the 253PQE include the Intel Core i9-14900HX at 56,004 and the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390 at 56,273, with the 253PQE trailing by 0.2% and 0.6% respectively.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear performance hierarchy between these two processors. The Intel Core 7 253PQE wins every benchmark in the head-to-head comparison, with no recorded wins for the Intel Core 7 240H. The 253PQE also holds a higher percentile ranking at 91 versus 82 for the 240H.

The 253PQE is positioned alongside much stronger competitors. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i9-14900HX, the AMD Ryzen AI Max 390, and the AMD Ryzen AI 9 HX PRO 470, all within 0.7% of its average score. The 240H, by contrast, sits near the Intel Core Ultra 3 205, the AMD Ryzen 9 5980HX, and the Intel Core Ultra 5 225H, all within 0.1% of its average score.

For workloads that depend on single-threaded speed, the 253PQE is the stronger part. Its 5.70 GHz boost clock and 61.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core demonstrate a substantial advantage in rendering tasks that scale poorly across cores. The 13.8% margin in PassMark single-thread shows that even in less favorable single-thread tests, the 253PQE remains ahead.

For multi-threaded workloads, the 253PQE maintains a consistent advantage across every recorded test. The 49.8% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore and the 42.4% lead in PassMark multithread indicate that the 20-thread configuration, larger L3 cache, and higher TDP translate into measurable performance gains across parallel tasks.

The 240H is a mobile processor with a 45 W TDP, while the 253PQE is a desktop processor with a 125 W TDP. The recorded data does not show any workload where the 240H closes the gap. The 253PQE is the stronger processor in every measured category, making it the appropriate choice for users who prioritize raw performance in both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications. The 240H remains the only option for mobile platform requirements, but the benchmark data does not support selecting it on performance grounds when the 253PQE is available.