Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235H Comparison

Intel Core 7 251E and Intel Core Ultra 5 235H are two actively produced Intel processors released on the same date, but they target different market segments. The Core 7 251E is a desktop part built on the Bartlett Lake platform, while the Core Ultra 5 235H is a mobile processor from the Arrow Lake-H family. The database contains benchmark results for the mobile chip, while the desktop part has no recorded scores. This analysis focuses on the measured performance of the Core Ultra 5 235H and the architectural and specification differences between the two products.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data applies solely to the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H; the Intel Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries in the database. Consequently, a direct comparison of measured scores between the two processors is not possible from the available data. The Core Ultra 5 235H achieves an average benchmark score of 37522 across all recorded tests, placing it at the 85th percentile among all CPUs in the database. This percentile figure indicates that the mobile processor outperforms the majority of tested CPUs in aggregate performance.

The Core Ultra 5 235H shows strong multicore results in Cinebench tests. It scores 2580 in Cinebench R15 multicore, 10751 in Cinebench R20 multicore, and 25598 in Cinebench R23 multicore. Single-core results are 364 in Cinebench R15, 1517 in Cinebench R20, and 3613 in Cinebench R23. These scores demonstrate consistent scaling across different versions of the rendering workload.

PassMark results for the Core Ultra 5 235H cover a range of computational tasks. The multithread score is 30091, while the single-thread score is 4359, recorded identically in both the passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread fields. In specific workloads, the processor scores 93509 in floating point math, 74247 in integer math, and 301979 in data compression. Data encryption scores 23121, extended instructions score 23354, and random string sorting scores 36208. The physics test records 1985, and the find prime numbers test records 239.

Since the Core 7 251E has no benchmark scores, its relative performance cannot be quantified. The database shows no head-to-head benchmark entries and no wins for either processor. The nearest rivals to the Core Ultra 5 235H provide context for its measured performance. The Intel Core i9-13900HK has an average score of 37425, which is 0.3 percent lower than the Core Ultra 5 235H. The Intel Core i5-13600K scores 37685, which is 0.4 percent higher. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F scores 37313, 0.6 percent lower, and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 37762, 0.6 percent higher. These deltas place the Core Ultra 5 235H in a tight competitive band, with all four rivals within roughly one percent of its average score.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 5 235H delivers measurable wins in every benchmark category where data exists, simply because it is the only one of the two processors with recorded scores. Its strongest relative performance appears in floating point math, where the 93509 score far exceeds its integer math result of 74247. Data compression also stands out with a score of 301979, which is substantially higher than the encryption score of 23121. These results indicate a processor well suited to workloads involving mathematical computation and data throughput.

The single-core versus multicore split is clear from the Cinebench results. The R23 multicore score of 25598 is roughly seven times the single-core score of 3613, reflecting the benefit of the processor's parallel execution capabilities. The PassMark multithread score of 30091 compared to the single-thread score of 4359 shows a similar ratio. For workloads that scale across cores, the Core Ultra 5 235H uses its full complement of 14 cores and 14 threads. For lightly threaded tasks, the single-core scores remain competitive within the database, as indicated by the 85th percentile overall placement.

The Core 7 251E, lacking benchmark data, has no recorded wins in any category. The database does not assign it any wins in head-to-head comparisons. Its architectural features, including a higher core count and larger L3 cache, suggest potential strengths in multithreaded desktop workloads, but no measured scores confirm this. The analysis must rely on the recorded data, which only covers the mobile part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ substantially in their underlying architecture. The Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 5 235H uses Arrow Lake-H. Bartlett Lake is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry, whereas Arrow Lake-H uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC. This process difference is significant: the smaller 3 nm node allows for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency in the mobile chip, while the 10 nm node used in the desktop part is an older, less dense manufacturing technology.

Core configuration diverges sharply. The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, indicating support for simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads, meaning it does not use multithreading; each core handles one thread. Despite having fewer cores, the mobile chip's per-core L1 cache is larger at 192 KB per core compared to 80 KB per core on the desktop part. L2 cache also favors the mobile chip at 3 MB per core versus 2 MB per core. However, the shared L3 cache strongly favors the desktop part: 36 MB shared on the Core 7 251E versus 18 MB shared on the Core Ultra 5 235H. The total L3 difference is a factor of two, which can benefit workloads with large working sets that fit into the shared cache.

The Core 7 251E has a die size of 257 mm², while the Core Ultra 5 235H has no recorded die size. The desktop part's physical package is built for Socket 1700, a desktop socket, while the mobile chip uses BGA 2049, a ball grid array package soldered to the motherboard. The desktop chip has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The mobile chip has a base clock of 2.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The desktop part offers a higher maximum boost frequency, while the mobile part starts from a higher base frequency.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 7 251E includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 235H includes Arc Graphics 140T. The database does not provide performance scores for either integrated GPU, so no comparative analysis of graphics capability is possible.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. The Core 7 251E is a desktop processor, while the Core Ultra 5 235H is a mobile processor. The desktop part uses Socket 1700, and the mobile part uses BGA 2049. Core counts differ: 24 cores and 32 threads for the desktop, 14 cores and 14 threads for the mobile. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz versus 2.40 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.60 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. Thermal design power differs substantially: the Core 7 251E has a TDP of 65 watts, and the Core Ultra 5 235H has a TDP of 28 watts. The lower TDP of the mobile chip aligns with its intended use in battery-powered systems, while the higher TDP of the desktop part allows for sustained performance under load.

Process node and foundry differ: 10 nm at Intel for the desktop, 3 nm at TSMC for the mobile. Cache hierarchies differ in all three levels. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 18 MB shared. Memory support differs: the Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 235H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but memory bandwidth differs: 89.6 GB/s for the desktop and 102.4 GB/s for the mobile. ECC memory support is present on the Core 7 251E and absent on the Core Ultra 5 235H.

PCI Express configuration differs. The Core 7 251E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 5 235H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes. This gives the desktop part double the CPU-attached PCIe lanes, which is relevant for discrete GPUs and expansion cards. Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Graphics 140T. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 251E is $384. The Core Ultra 5 235H has no recorded launch MSRP. Both processors have locked multipliers, and both have an active production status. Release dates are identical. Part numbers are SRQDUQ657 for the desktop and SRQAP for the mobile. The Core Ultra 5 235H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 family, while the Core 7 251E has no series designation recorded. The mobile chip has a generation label of Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake-H), and the desktop chip has a generation label of Core 7 (Bartlett Lake).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235H has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The Core 7 251E uses a 10 nm process node at Intel, and the Core Ultra 5 235H uses a 3 nm process node at TSMC.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 235H support ECC memory?

A: No, the Core Ultra 5 235H does not support ECC memory. The Core 7 251E does support ECC memory.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 235H compare to its nearest rivals in average benchmark score?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235H has an average benchmark score of 37522. The Intel Core i9-13900HK scores 37425, 0.3 percent lower; the Intel Core i5-13600K scores 37685, 0.4 percent higher; the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F scores 37313, 0.6 percent lower; and the AMD Ryzen AI 5 PRO 435 scores 37762, 0.6 percent higher.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 251E has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, which is higher than the Core Ultra 5 235H boost clock of 5.00 GHz.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 5 235H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X.