Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison
Intel Core 7 251E
Core Ultra 3 105UL
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL
Where Each One Wins
The recorded benchmark data splits sharply between the two processors. The Intel Core 7 251E has no entry in the benchmark database, meaning there are zero recorded scores for it across any test. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL, by contrast, has a full set of measurements across Cinebench and Passmark workloads. With winsA at 0 and winsB at 0, the head-to-head comparison is one-sided by absence: all available performance data belongs to the Ultra 3 105UL.
For the Ultra 3 105UL, the data shows a multi-core Cinebench R23 score of 8742 and a single-core score of 1234. In Passmark tests, it delivers 41171 in integer math, 30750 in floating point math, 93961 in data compression, and 6354 in data encryption. The single-thread Passmark result is 3382, while the multithread score reaches 10285. These numbers place it at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13061.
The Core 7 251E, lacking any benchmark entries, cannot be positioned on any workload curve. The database shows no wins for either part. Practical interpretation: the Ultra 3 105UL is the only one of the two with measurable performance, so any use-case split that favors the 251E must rely on architectural specifications rather than tested results. The 251E offers 24 cores, 32 threads, and a 5.60 GHz boost clock, but without benchmark scores, its actual workload behavior remains unquantified in this database.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different Intel design families and socket platforms. The Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and fits the Intel Socket 1700. It is built on a 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses the Meteor Lake architecture with the Meteor Lake-PS codename, fits the Intel Socket 1851, and is built on a 7 nm process node. The die size for the Ultra 3 is not recorded.
Core and thread counts differ substantially. The 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads; the 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz for the 251E versus 1.50 GHz for the 105UL, and boost clocks are 5.60 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. Thermal design power is 65 W for the 251E and 15 W for the 105UL. The 251E supports ECC memory; the 105UL does not. Memory support also diverges: the 251E accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, while the 105UL supports only DDR5, with the specification noting that support depends on the motherboard. Both use dual-channel memory buses, and both show 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth.
Cache layouts differ. The 251E has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The 105UL has 112 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3. The 251E uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes; the 105UL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also differ: the 251E carries UHD Graphics 770, while the 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 48EU.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads.
Q: What is the thermal design power for each?
A: The Core 7 251E is rated at 65 W. The Core Ultra 3 105UL is rated at 15 W.
Q: Does the Core Ultra 3 105UL support ECC memory?
A: No. The Core Ultra 3 105UL does not support ECC memory. The Core 7 251E does support ECC memory.
Q: What integrated graphics does each processor use?
A: The Core 7 251E uses UHD Graphics 770. The Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Arc Xe-LPG 48EU.
Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Core Ultra 3 105UL?
A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL has an average benchmark score of 13061 and sits at the 68th percentile of all CPUs in the database.
Q: Are there any benchmark scores recorded for the Core 7 251E?
A: No. The database contains no benchmark entries for the Core 7 251E.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across every major specification category. The Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 3 105UL uses Meteor Lake-PS. The 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads versus 8 cores and 10 threads for the 105UL. Base clock is 2.10 GHz for the 251E and 1.50 GHz for the 105UL; boost clock is 5.60 GHz versus 4.20 GHz. TDP is 65 W versus 15 W. The 251E fits Socket 1700, the 105UL fits Socket 1851. Process node is 10 nm for the 251E and 7 nm for the 105UL. Die size is 257 mm² for the 251E, with no recorded die size for the 105UL.
L1 cache is 80 KB per core on the 251E and 112 KB per core on the 105UL. L2 cache is 2 MB per core on both. L3 cache is 36 MB shared on the 251E and 10 MB shared on the 105UL. The 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5; the 105UL supports only DDR5, dependent on the motherboard. ECC memory is supported on the 251E but not on the 105UL. PCIe is Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the 251E, Gen 4 with 8 lanes on the 105UL. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Xe-LPG 48EU. The 251E launched on 2025-01-12 with a launch MSRP of $384. The 105UL launched on 2024-04-07 with a launch MSRP of $295. The 251E part number is SRQDUQ657; the 105UL is SRN9D. The 105UL belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1; the 251E has no series designation.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The head-to-head benchmark list is empty. No direct test results exist for both processors side by side. The only benchmark data in the database belongs to the Core Ultra 3 105UL. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 8742, and its single-core score is 1234. Cinebench R20 results are 3671 multi-core and 518 single-core. Cinebench R15 results are 881 multi-core and 124 single-core.
Passmark results for the 105UL show integer math at 41171, floating point math at 30750, extended instructions at 5634, data compression at 93961, data encryption at 6354, and random string sorting at 11179. The find prime numbers test scores 44, physics scores 718, multithread scores 10285, and single-thread scores 3382. The average benchmark score is 13061, which lands at the 68th percentile. Its nearest rivals in the database are the Intel Core i5-9400F with an average score of 13041 and a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-10750H at 13024 with a delta of 0.3%, the Intel Core i5-8500 at 13142 with a delta of -0.6%, and the Intel Core i7-7700K at 13291 with a delta of -1.7%. These deltas place the 105UL within a narrow band around its closest competitors, slightly above the i5-9400F and i7-10750H, and slightly below the i5-8500 and i7-7700K.
Because the 251E has no benchmark scores, no comparison of relative wins is possible. The data shows zero wins for each processor. Any statement about the 251E's performance would be speculative and outside the recorded database.
The Verdict
The database presents a lopsided picture. The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL is fully measured, with an average benchmark score of 13061 and a 68th percentile ranking. It delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8742 and a Passmark single-thread score of 3382. Its performance sits within 1.7% of the Intel Core i7-7700K and within 0.6% of the Intel Core i5-8500, based on the recorded delta percentages. The 105UL is a low-power part at 15 W, uses the Meteor Lake architecture on a 7 nm node, and supports DDR5 memory with Arc Xe-LPG 48EU integrated graphics.
The Intel Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark scores, no percentile ranking, and no average score. Its specifications show a 24-core, 32-thread processor with a 5.60 GHz boost clock, 36 MB of L3 cache, and PCIe Gen 5 support. It draws 65 W and supports ECC memory. Without benchmark data, its standing relative to the 105UL cannot be quantified.
For a buyer choosing strictly from the recorded data, the Core Ultra 3 105UL is the only option with verified performance numbers. The Core 7 251E offers a substantially higher core count, higher clocks, and more cache on paper, but the database contains no evidence of how that translates into actual workload results. The 105UL's results place it in the upper half of all CPUs, at the 68th percentile, with a measured average score of 13061. The 251E's percentile is recorded as 50, but with an average benchmark score of 0 and no entries, that percentile is not backed by any test data.
The practical reading: if the workload requires proven multi-threaded and single-threaded performance as recorded in the database, the Core Ultra 3 105UL is the defensible choice. If the workload depends on the 251E's higher core count, higher boost clock, ECC support, or PCIe Gen 5 capability, those are specification advantages, not measured performance advantages. The data does not support a claim that the 251E outperforms the 105UL, nor does it support the reverse. The only measurable performance in this comparison belongs to the Core Ultra 3 105UL.