Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core 9 270H Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits these two processors into distinct use-case profiles. The Intel Core 7 251TE wins 13 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 9 270H claims 4 victories. The Core 7 251TE dominates heavily in multi-threaded and math-intensive workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25518 versus 18000 for the Core 9 270H represents a 41.8% advantage, the largest multi-core gap in the entire comparison set. PassMark integer math also favors the Core 7 251TE by 28.8%, with scores of 125739 versus 97654. Floating point math shows a 21.2% lead for the Core 7 251TE (85607 versus 70640). These results point to sustained parallel throughput as the Core 7 251TE's primary strength.

The Core 9 270H counters in single-threaded PassMark tests. Its single-thread score of 3944 beats the Core 7 251TE's 3568, a 9.5% margin. The PassMark physics test also goes to the Core 9 270H by a narrow 1.4% (1966 versus 1938). The extended instructions workload shows the Core 9 270H ahead by 15.5% (20079 versus 16974). This mix suggests the Core 9 270H handles instruction-heavy code and physics calculations with slightly better efficiency per thread, while the Core 7 251TE wins where raw core count and parallel scaling matter most.

Cinebench single-core results contradict the PassMark single-thread outcome. The Core 7 251TE leads in Cinebench R15 single-core by 4.3% (362 versus 347) and in R20 single-core by 4.3% (1512 versus 1449). The R23 single-core gap is even larger at 76.6% (3602 versus 2040), though that extreme delta suggests a possible measurement anomaly for the Core 9 270H in that specific run. Data compression is nearly identical, with the Core 7 251TE ahead by only 0.2% (334399 versus 333785). Random string sorting favors the Core 7 251TE by 7.5% (39643 versus 36867). Prime number finding shows a 25% lead for the Core 7 251TE (140 versus 112). Data encryption gives the Core 7 251TE a 14.5% edge (22176 versus 19369). The overall average benchmark score confirms the split: 41650 for the Core 7 251TE against 38335 for the Core 9 270H, a difference that places the Core 7 251TE in the 88th percentile of all CPUs versus the 86th percentile for the Core 9 270H.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design lineages. The Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die size. The Core 9 270H belongs to the Raptor Lake-H family, also on a 10 nm process, with no die size recorded in the database. Core counts diverge sharply: the Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads. This 10-core and 12-thread difference explains the multi-core benchmark dominance of the Core 7 251TE.

Cache hierarchies differ as well. Both chips share 80 KB of L1 per core. The L2 cache is 1.25 MB per core on the Core 7 251TE versus 2 MB per core on the Core 9 270H. Total L3 cache swings the other way: 36 MB shared on the Core 7 251TE versus 24 MB shared on the Core 9 270H. The larger per-core L2 on the Core 9 270H may contribute to its single-thread PassMark advantage, while the 12 MB larger L3 pool on the Core 7 251TE helps maintain data locality across its extra cores.

Clock behavior also separates them. The Core 7 251TE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Core 9 270H runs at a 2.70 GHz base and a 5.80 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the Core 9 270H gives it a head start in lightly threaded tasks, but the Core 7 251TE's boost ceiling is only 0.40 GHz lower, so peak single-core frequency is comparable. Both chips have locked multipliers.

Memory support is identical in type (DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel), but the Core 7 251TE records a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s while the Core 9 270H has no bandwidth figure in the database. ECC memory is supported on the Core 7 251TE but not on the Core 9 270H. PCIe lane counts differ: the Core 7 251TE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Core 9 270H provides Gen 5 with 8 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics also diverge, with the Core 7 251TE using UHD Graphics 770 and the Core 9 270H using Iris Xe Graphics 96EU.

Form factor and socket determine platform compatibility. The Core 7 251TE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700, released 2025-01-12. The Core 9 270H is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1744, released 2024-12-17. Both carry 45 W TDP. The Core 7 251TE part number is SRQAXQ5ZG; the Core 9 270H part number is SRQ6V.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core 9 270H has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Core 7 251TE provides 10 additional cores and 12 additional threads.

Q: What do the Cinebench R23 multi-core scores show?

A: The Core 7 251TE scores 25518, while the Core 9 270H scores 18000. This gives the Core 7 251TE a 41.8% lead in that workload.

Q: Which processor wins the PassMark single-thread test and by how much?

A: The Core 9 270H wins with a score of 3944 versus 3568 for the Core 7 251TE, a 9.5% margin.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration. The Core 7 251TE additionally supports ECC memory, while the Core 9 270H does not.

Q: What is the difference in L3 cache capacity?

A: The Core 7 251TE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 9 270H has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 251TE has 12 MB more.

Q: How does the average benchmark score compare?

A: The Core 7 251TE averages 41650 across all recorded benchmarks. The Core 9 270H averages 38335. The Core 7 251TE sits in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 9 270H sits in the 86th percentile.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification category in the database. Core count: 24 versus 14. Thread count: 32 versus 20. Base clock: 1.40 GHz versus 2.70 GHz. Boost clock: 5.40 GHz versus 5.80 GHz. Socket: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 1744. Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Raptor Lake-H. Generation label: Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) versus Core 9 (Raptor Lake Refresh). Die size: 215 mm² versus not recorded. L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core versus 2 MB per core. L3 cache: 36 MB shared versus 24 MB shared. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s versus not recorded. ECC support: true versus false. PCIe lanes: 16 versus 8. Integrated graphics: UHD Graphics 770 versus Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile. Release date: 2025-01-12 versus 2024-12-17. Part number: SRQAXQ5ZG versus SRQ6V. Shared specifications include manufacturer (Intel), process node (10 nm), foundry (Intel), L1 cache (80 KB per core), memory type (DDR4, DDR5), memory bus (dual-channel), TDP (45 W), and locked multiplier status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest win for the Core 7 251TE arrives in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 3602 against 2040 for the Core 9 270H, a 76.6% advantage. This unusually large delta contrasts with the much smaller single-core margins in R15 (4.3%, 362 versus 347) and R20 (4.3%, 1512 versus 1449), indicating the R23 result may reflect a specific run condition rather than a consistent architectural edge. The Cinebench R23 multi-core test shows a more stable pattern: 25518 versus 18000, a 41.8% lead that aligns with the core count disparity.

PassMark integer math delivers the second-largest win for the Core 7 251TE at 28.8% (125739 versus 97654). Floating point math follows at 21.2% (85607 versus 70640). Prime number finding shows a 25% lead (140 versus 112). Data encryption gives the Core 7 251TE a 14.5% margin (22176 versus 19369). Random string sorting adds a 7.5% win (39643 versus 36867). PassMark multithread shows a 4.4% edge (30022 versus 28764). Cinebench R15 multi-core and R20 multi-core both show 4.4% leads (2572 versus 2464 and 10717 versus 10268 respectively). Data compression is nearly tied at 0.2% (334399 versus 333785).

The Core 9 270H takes its wins in PassMark extended instructions (20079 versus 16974, a 15.5% margin), PassMark single-thread (3944 versus 3568, 9.5%), PassMark physics (1966 versus 1938, 1.4%), and the duplicate PassMark singlethread entry (3944 versus 3568, 9.5%). The physics margin is the smallest of any recorded head-to-head result. The extended instructions result is notable because it reverses the general trend, suggesting the Core 9 270H's higher per-core L2 and boost clock help in SIMD-heavy code despite fewer cores.

Nearest rival comparisons place both chips in similar competitive territory. The Core 7 251TE sits within 0.6% of the Intel Core i7-14700T (which averages 41914) and within 0.3% of the Intel Core i7-12850HX (41779). The Core 9 270H tracks within 0.3% of the AMD Ryzen 7 250 (38221) and within 0.2% of the Intel Core i5-13600HX (38261). Both processors effectively trade positions with their closest neighbors, with the Core 7 251TE's nearest rivals all within a 0.6% band and the Core 9 270H's rivals within a 0.3% band.

The final tally across all recorded workloads favors the Core 7 251TE by a 13 to 4 margin. The Core 7 251TE's wins concentrate in multi-core rendering, arithmetic, and data processing tasks. The Core 9 270H's wins concentrate in single-thread PassMark tasks, physics simulation, and extended instruction execution. For workloads that scale with core count, the Core 7 251TE is the clear choice. For workloads that depend on per-thread efficiency and high base clocks, the Core 9 270H holds a measurable advantage.