Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons for the Intel Core 7 251E. The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, while the Core 7 251E has no benchmark entries in the database. As a result, the head-to-head comparison is one-sided: all recorded performance data belongs to the Core Ultra 5 338H.

The Core Ultra 5 338H delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 16,331 and a single-core score of 2,044. In Cinebench R20, it records 10,213 multi-core and 1,441 single-core. The R15 results show 2,504 multi-core and 305 single-core. PassMark results include a multi-thread score of 28,717, single-thread of 4,180, integer math at 64,934, floating point math at 84,067, data compression at 276,539, and data encryption at 21,367.

The Core Ultra 5 338H sits at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 33,989. Its nearest rivals show tight competition: the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H scores 34,083, which is 0.3% higher; the Intel Core i7-12800HX scores 33,875, 0.3% lower; the Intel Xeon 6353P scores 33,844, 0.4% lower; and the AMD EPYC 4244P scores 34,220, 0.7% higher. These delta values indicate the Core Ultra 5 338H sits within a narrow performance band around its closest competitors, with the AMD EPYC 4244P holding the largest advantage at 0.7%.

Because the Core 7 251E has no benchmark scores, the recorded data cannot establish which processor wins any workload category. The only conclusion supported by the database is that the Core Ultra 5 338H has measurable performance across 17 benchmark tests, while the Core 7 251E has none.

FAQ

Q: What benchmark scores does the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H achieve in Cinebench tests?

A: The Core Ultra 5 338H records 16,331 multi-core and 2,044 single-core in Cinebench R23; 10,213 multi-core and 1,441 single-core in R20; and 2,504 multi-core and 305 single-core in R15.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 5 338H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 5 338H averages 33,989 points. The AMD EPIC 4244P leads by 0.7% at 34,220, the Core Ultra 7 165H leads by 0.3% at 34,083, the Core i7-12800HX trails by 0.3% at 33,875, and the Xeon 6353P trails by 0.4% at 33,844.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 251E have any benchmark results in the database?

A: No. The Core 7 251E has an empty benchmarks array and an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no recorded performance data exists for it.

Q: What is the Core Ultra 5 338H's PassMark single-thread score?

A: The PassMark single-thread score is 4,180, and the multi-thread score is 28,717.

Q: What percentile does the Core Ultra 5 338H rank at?

A: It ranks at the 84th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 251E has a boost clock of 5.60 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 338H reaches 4.70 GHz.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge substantially in their architectural designs. The Intel Core 7 251E uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 7 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process node with a die size of 257 mm². The Core Ultra 5 338H uses the Panther Lake architecture, specifically Panther Lake-H, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 3. It is built on a 3 nm process node, with no die size recorded.

Core counts differ significantly. The Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. The Core 7 251E therefore offers double the core count and more than double the thread count. This suggests the desktop part is designed for heavily parallel workloads, while the mobile part prioritizes efficiency.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 251E has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 338H has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core L1 and L2 caches are larger on the Core Ultra 5 338H, but the shared L3 pool is twice as large on the Core 7 251E.

Memory support splits the two parts. The Core 7 251E supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory over a dual-channel bus with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth and ECC memory capability. The Core Ultra 5 338H supports only LPDDR5X memory, also dual-channel, with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth and no ECC support. The mobile processor has higher memory bandwidth despite its lower TDP.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 7 251E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 5 338H provides Gen 5 with only 4 lanes (CPU only). The desktop part offers four times the PCIe lane count.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 7 251E uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 338H uses Arc B370. The launch dates place the Core 7 251E at January 12, 2025, and the Core Ultra 5 338H at January 4, 2026. Socket types are entirely different: Intel Socket 1700 for the desktop part versus Intel BGA 2540 for the mobile part.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports a clear choice for users requiring measured performance: the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H is the only one of the two with any benchmark results. It ranks at the 84th percentile among all CPUs, with an average score of 33,989 and a narrow competitive band against its four nearest rivals. Users seeking a processor with verified multi-thread and single-thread scores would select the Core Ultra 5 338H based on the database alone.

The Intel Core 7 251E offers structural advantages that the database records: 24 cores, 32 threads, a 5.60 GHz boost clock, 36 MB of L3 cache, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, and ECC memory support. These specifications position it as a high-core-count desktop part. However, without benchmark scores, the database cannot quantify how those specifications translate into actual workload performance.

The market segments confirm the intended use cases. The Core 7 251E targets desktop systems with a 65 W TDP, Intel Socket 1700, and a launch MSRP of $384. The Core Ultra 5 338H targets mobile systems with a 25 W TDP and Intel BGA 2540. The mobile part has no launch MSRP recorded.

For a user selecting purely on measured data, the Core Ultra 5 338H is the only candidate with evidence. For a user selecting on specifications, the Core 7 251E has the higher core count, higher clock speeds, larger shared cache, more PCIe lanes, and ECC support. The database does not allow a performance verdict for the Core 7 251E because no measurements exist.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Cores: 24 (Core 7 251E) versus 12 (Core Ultra 5 338H)
• Threads: 32 versus 12
• Base clock: 2.10 GHz versus 1.90 GHz
• Boost clock: 5.60 GHz versus 4.70 GHz
• TDP: 65 W versus 25 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2540
• Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Panther Lake
• Generation: Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) versus Ultra 5 (Panther Lake-H)
• Process node: 10 nm versus 3 nm
• Die size: 257 mm² versus not recorded
• L1 cache per core: 80 KB versus 192 KB
• L2 cache per core: 2 MB versus 2.5 MB
• L3 cache shared: 36 MB versus 18 MB
• Memory support: DDR4, DDR5 versus LPDDR5X
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus 136.5 GB/s
• ECC memory: true versus false
• PCIe lanes: 16 versus 4
• Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc B370
• Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile
• Release date: January 12, 2025 versus January 4, 2026
• Launch MSRP: $384 versus none recorded
• Part number: SRQDUQ657 versus SA4REQ9EW
• Benchmark scores: none versus 17 recorded tests
• Percentile vs all CPUs: 50 versus 84
• Average benchmark score: 0 versus 33,989