Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison
Intel Core 7 251E
Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus
FAQ
Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?
A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Core 7 251E offers a higher thread count due to Hyper-Threading support, whereas the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus operates with one thread per core.
Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds of each processor?
A: The Intel Core 7 251E has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a base clock of 4.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.30 GHz. The Core Ultra 5 starts at a higher frequency but peaks slightly lower.
Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?
A: The Intel Core 7 251E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports only DDR5 memory. This makes the Core 7 251E more flexible for systems using older memory modules.
Q: Does either processor include integrated graphics?
A: The Intel Core 7 251E includes UHD Graphics 770. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics (N/A). A discrete graphics card is required for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s, which is higher than the 89.6 GB/s of the Intel Core 7 251E. The Core Ultra 5 can move data to and from memory faster.
Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?
A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is in the 93rd percentile, while the Intel Core 7 251E is in the 50th percentile. The Core Ultra 5 ranks significantly higher in overall performance distribution.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 7 generation. It is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2. It is built on a 3 nm process by TSMC, which is a much more advanced manufacturing node.
The transistor count differs sharply. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus integrates 17,800 million transistors, while the Core 7 251E does not have a listed transistor count. Die size also differs: the Core 7 251E measures 257 mm², and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus measures 243 mm². Despite having fewer transistors listed, the Core 7 251E has a larger die.
Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The Core 7 251E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 provides more private cache per core, while the Core 7 251E offers a larger shared L3 pool.
Memory support and PCIe lanes also differ. The Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 only. The Core 7 251E provides 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes from the CPU, whereas the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus provides 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes. The Core Ultra 5 has more direct PCIe connectivity for expansion.
The Core 7 251E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an unlocked multiplier, allowing overclocking, while the Core 7 251E does not. The Core 7 251E integrates UHD Graphics 770, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The database contains benchmark results for the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, but no benchmark scores are recorded for the Intel Core 7 251E. The wins count is 0 for the Core 7 251E and 0 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus in the head-to-head comparison, because the Core 7 251E lacks recorded scores. The available data for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus shows strong results across multiple tests.
In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4305. In single-core, it scores 607. Moving to Cinebench R20, the multicore score jumps to 17941, and the single-core score is 2532. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score reaches 42718, with a single-core score of 6030. These results indicate strong multi-threaded rendering performance and competitive single-thread capability.
Passmark tests show varied strengths. The data compression score is 553155, which is very high relative to typical CPU benchmarks. Data encryption scores 41292, and extended instructions score 42880. Prime number finding scores 452, which is comparatively low, suggesting weak performance in that specific integer workload. Floating point math scores 159824, and integer math scores 123030. The multithread score is 50146, and the physics score is 3183. Random string sorting scores 67209. Single-thread performance is recorded at 4698.
Because the Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries, the database cannot directly compare the two in any workload. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus stands alone with its recorded scores. Its average benchmark score is 66159, placing it in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals confirm its position: the Intel Core 9 273PQE scores 66099, a delta of 0.1 percent, and the AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D scores 65914, a delta of 0.4 percent. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus scores 66855, a delta of -1 percent, and the AMD EPYC 4465P scores 66925, a delta of -1.1 percent. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits within a tight performance band around these processors.
The Verdict
The data shows a clear split between the two processors. The Intel Core 7 251E offers more cores, more threads, integrated graphics, DDR4 support, and a higher boost clock of 5.60 GHz. It also consumes a listed TDP of 65 watts, which is lower than the 125 watts of the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The Core 7 251E is a high-core-count desktop part with flexible memory support.
The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus delivers far superior benchmark results, with an average score of 66159 and a 93rd percentile ranking. It uses a smaller 3 nm process, a higher base clock of 4.20 GHz, more PCIe lanes, and higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. It has no integrated graphics, so it requires a discrete GPU. Its unlocked multiplier enables overclocking.
For users who need a processor with integrated graphics and broad memory compatibility, the Core 7 251E is the only choice between the two. For users who prioritize raw compute performance and have a discrete graphics card, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the stronger option based on recorded benchmarks. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus also ranks much higher among all CPUs, at the 93rd percentile versus the 50th percentile of the Core 7 251E.
The Core 7 251E has a launch MSRP of $384, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has a launch MSRP of $184. The database does not include benchmark scores for the Core 7 251E, so its real-world performance cannot be quantified here. The Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has extensive recorded performance data, and that data confirms it as a high-performing desktop processor.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ in several key specifications. The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18 cores and 18 threads. Base clock is 2.10 GHz for the Core 7 251E versus 4.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Boost clock is 5.60 GHz for the Core 7 251E versus 5.30 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
TDP is 65 watts for the Core 7 251E and 125 watts for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The Core 7 251E uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus uses Intel Socket 1851. The process node is 10 nm for the Core 7 251E and 3 nm for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The foundry is Intel for the Core 7 251E and TSMC for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
Die size is 257 mm² for the Core 7 251E and 243 mm² for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Transistor count is not listed for the Core 7 251E, but the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 17,800 million transistors. L1 cache is 80 KB per core for the Core 7 251E and 192 KB per core for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 cache is 36 MB shared versus 30 MB shared.
Memory support: DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 7 251E, DDR5 only for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. PCIe lanes are 16 for the Core 7 251E and 20 for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 for the Core 7 251E, N/A for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The multiplier is locked for the Core 7 251E and unlocked for the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 7 251E wins in core count, thread count, and maximum boost clock. It also provides integrated graphics, which the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus lacks. It supports DDR4 memory, which is useful for upgrading existing systems. Its lower TDP of 65 watts indicates lower power draw compared to the 125 watts of the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus. The larger L3 cache of 36 MB may benefit workloads that rely on shared cache.
The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins in base clock, memory bandwidth, PCIe lane count, and process node. The 3 nm process from TSMC is more advanced than the 10 nm process used by the Core 7 251E. The higher memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s supports faster data movement. The 20 PCIe Gen 5 lanes provide more expansion headroom. The unlocked multiplier allows overclocking, and the part number SA4V3 indicates a distinct SKU.
In benchmark performance, the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus holds all recorded scores. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 42718 and single-core score of 6030 show strong rendering capability. Passmark scores for data compression, floating point math, and integer math are high. The average benchmark score of 66159 places it near the Intel Core 9 273PQE and AMD Ryzen 9 7950X3D, with deltas of 0.1 percent and 0.4 percent respectively. It trails the Intel Core Ultra 5 250K Plus by 1 percent and the AMD EPYC 4465P by 1.1 percent.
The Core 7 251E has no recorded benchmark scores, so no workload-specific wins can be attributed to it. The data supports the Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus as the better-performing processor in every measured test. The Core 7 251E remains a viable option for systems needing integrated graphics, DDR4 support, or a higher boost clock, but its performance profile is unquantified in this database.