Intel Core 7 251E vs Intel Processor U301L Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct benchmark scores for either the Intel Core 7 251E or the Intel Processor U301L. Both processors hold a percentile rank of 50 against all CPUs in the database, and both show an average benchmark score of zero. The head-to-head benchmark table is empty, so no exact performance deltas can be cited from direct measurements.

What the data does show is a substantial structural disparity. The Core 7 251E provides 24 cores and 32 threads, while the U301L provides 5 cores and 6 threads. The Core 7 251E boosts to 5.60 GHz from a 2.10 GHz base clock. The U301L boosts to 2.20 GHz from a 1.20 GHz base clock. In a purely thread-saturated workload, the Core 7 251E has roughly five times the core count and more than five times the thread count, and its boost clock is more than double that of the U301L. Those figures alone indicate that any multi-threaded benchmark that scales well across cores would favor the Core 7 251E by a wide margin.

The Core 7 251E also carries 36 MB of shared L3 cache versus 8 MB on the U301L. The per-core L2 cache is 2 MB per core on the 251E, versus 1.25 MB per core on the U301L. For workloads that repeatedly access a working set larger than 8 MB, the 251E has a clear caching advantage that would show up in benchmark scores, even if the database does not currently list those scores.

The U301L, by contrast, has a 15 W TDP against the 65 W TDP of the 251E. That places the U301L in a different power envelope entirely. Any benchmark that measures performance per watt, or that runs under a strict power limit, would favor the U301L. The data cannot quantify that advantage without benchmark scores, but the TDP figures recorded in the database establish the constraint.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Processor U301L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Core 7 251E has a base clock of 2.10 GHz and a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The U301L has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 2.20 GHz.

Q: How does the cache compare?

A: 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 U301L has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors use the same socket?

A: Yes, both use Intel Socket 1700.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The Core 7 251E supports ECC memory. The U301L does not.

Q: What integrated graphics do they have?

A: The Core 7 251E uses UHD Graphics 770. The U301L uses UHD Graphics 64EU.

Q: What are the launch MSRPs?

A: The Core 7 251E has a launch MSRP of $384. The U301L has a launch MSRP of $107.

The Verdict

The data points in opposite directions for these two processors. The Intel Core 7 251E is the pick for anyone who needs raw compute throughput. Its 24 cores, 32 threads, 5.60 GHz boost clock, and 36 MB of L3 cache place it in a different performance class than the U301L. The U301L cannot match it in core count, thread count, clock speed, or cache capacity. For CPU-bound work that uses many threads, the 251E is the only choice between the two.

The Intel Processor U301L is the pick for constrained environments. Its 15 W TDP is less than a quarter of the 65 W TDP of the 251E. It is also a mobile-market processor, while the 251E is a desktop-market processor. If the use case is a low-power embedded or mobile system where heat and power draw are the limiting factors, the U301L fits that envelope and the 251E does not.

Neither processor has recorded benchmark scores in the database, so a direct performance comparison cannot be quantified. The structural specifications, however, make the division clear: the 251E for throughput, the U301L for low power.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every major specification field.

Cores and threads: the Core 7 251E has 24 cores and 32 threads. The U301L has 5 cores and 6 threads.

Clocks: the 251E runs at 2.10 GHz base and 5.60 GHz boost. The U301L runs at 1.20 GHz base and 2.20 GHz boost.

TDP: the 251E is rated at 65 W. The U301L is rated at 15 W.

Process node: both are listed at 10 nm, but the 251E is built on Bartlett Lake while the U301L uses Raptor Lake architecture and the Raptor Lake-PS codename.

Cache: the 251E has 2 MB of L2 per core and 36 MB of shared L3. The U301L has 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. L1 is identical at 80 KB per core.

Memory bandwidth: the 251E lists 89.6 GB/s. The U301L has no bandwidth figure recorded.

ECC memory: supported on the 251E, not supported on the U301L.

PCIe: the 251E uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The U301L uses Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 on the 251E, UHD Graphics 64EU on the U301L.

Market segment: desktop for the 251E, mobile for the U301L.

Release date: the 251E released on 2025-01-12. The U301L released on 2024-04-07.

Launch MSRP: $384 for the 251E, $107 for the U301L.

Die size: the 251E is recorded at 257 mm². The U301L has no die size recorded.

Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus. Both are active production parts. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 7 251E uses Bartlett Lake as its codename, with a generation label of Core 7 (Bartlett Lake). The U301L uses Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename and a generation label of Intel Processor (Raptor Lake).

Both are manufactured by Intel on a 10 nm process, and both use the Intel Socket 1700. The 251E has a recorded die size of 257 mm², while the U301L has no die size in the database.

The cache architecture differs in scale. The 251E provides 2 MB of L2 per core and 36 MB of shared L3. The U301L provides 1.25 MB of L2 per core and 8 MB of shared L3. The L1 cache is the same on both at 80 KB per core.

Memory support is similar: both support DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The 251E has a recorded memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the U301L has no bandwidth figure. The 251E supports ECC memory; the U301L does not.

PCIe connectivity differs by generation and lane count. The 251E provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The U301L provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: the 251E uses UHD Graphics 770, while the U301L uses UHD Graphics 64EU.

The production status for both is Active. The 251E was released on 2025-01-12, and the U301L on 2024-04-07.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 251E wins in every category that scales with compute resources. Its 24 cores and 32 threads dominate the 5-core, 6-thread configuration of the U301L. Its 5.60 GHz boost clock gives it a large advantage in single-threaded responsiveness, at least on paper, over the 2.20 GHz boost of the U301L. Its 36 MB of shared L3 cache is 4.5 times the 8 MB on the U301L, which matters for workloads with large working sets. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth is recorded, while the U301L has no bandwidth figure at all, meaning the 251E has a documented memory throughput advantage. Its Gen 5 PCIe with 16 lanes provides more I/O bandwidth than the Gen 4, 8-lane configuration of the U301L. It also supports ECC memory, which the U301L does not. For desktop workloads, server-adjacent tasks, content creation, compilation, simulation, or any multi-threaded compute, the 251E is the processor the data favors.

The U301L wins in power efficiency and mobility. Its 15 W TDP is less than a quarter of the 65 W TDP of the 251E. It is classified in the mobile market segment, while the 251E is classified in the desktop segment. For battery-powered systems, fanless designs, or thermally constrained enclosures, the U301L fits where the 251E cannot. Its launch MSRP of $107 is also recorded, versus $384 for the 251E, though that difference is a specification fact rather than a performance verdict.

There are no recorded benchmark wins for either processor in the head-to-head table, and no direct scores exist in the database. The wins described here are inferred strictly from the recorded specifications: core count, thread count, clock speeds, cache sizes, TDP, market segment, and platform features. Where the workload is throughput-bound, the 251E has the structural advantage. Where the workload is power-bound or physically constrained, the U301L has the structural advantage.