Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core i9-14901E Comparison

The Intel Core 7 251TE and Intel Core i9-14901E are both desktop processors on the Intel Socket 1700 platform, yet they pursue markedly different design strategies. The 251TE pairs a 24-core, 32-thread configuration with a 1.40 GHz base clock and a 5.40 GHz boost clock, while the i9-14901E uses 8 cores and 16 threads with a 2.80 GHz base and 5.60 GHz boost. Benchmark data shows the i9-14901E wins 12 of 17 head-to-head tests, but the 251TE secures decisive victories in specific workloads, including a 15.8% lead in data compression and a 19.4% lead in data encryption. The recorded average benchmark scores place the 251TE at 41650 (88th percentile) versus 37911 (86th percentile) for the i9-14901E, indicating the 251TE holds a slight overall edge despite losing most individual tests. This split suggests the 24-core part excels in parallel data tasks, while the 8-core part dominates single-threaded and physics-based workloads.

The Verdict

The data indicates the Intel Core 7 251TE is the better choice for workloads that stress parallel integer and floating-point operations, particularly data compression and encryption. It outperforms the i9-14901E by 15.8% in PassMark data compression and by 19.4% in data encryption, and it also leads by 11.5% in integer math and by 5.6% in floating-point math. Its average benchmark score of 41650 exceeds the i9-14901E's 37911 by roughly 9.9%, and it sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs versus the i9-14901E's 86th percentile. Users running compression utilities, encryption pipelines, or heavy integer processing should prefer the 251TE.

The Intel Core i9-14901E is the better choice for single-threaded responsiveness and physics simulations. It leads by 18.1% in PassMark single-thread performance, by 36.3% in PassMark physics, and by 25.9% in prime number finding. Its Cinebench scores are consistently higher across R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core tests, though by margins under 1.1%. The i9-14901E also holds a 0.9% edge in Cinebench R23 multi-core (25753 versus 25518) and in PassMark multithread (30298 versus 30022), meaning it remains competitive in heavily threaded rendering despite having only 8 cores. The i9-14901E is the pick for applications that depend on high clock speeds, such as interactive design tools or physics-based engineering simulations.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, and Intel Socket 1700, but their internal architectures diverge sharply. The Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the "Core 7 (Bartlett Lake)" generation, while the i9-14901E uses the Raptor Lake and Raptor Lake-R codenames from the "Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh)" generation. The 251TE packs 24 cores and 32 threads, whereas the i9-14901E contains 8 cores and 16 threads, a 3x difference in core count and a 2x difference in thread count. This explains why the 251TE wins parallel data tasks despite its lower base clock.

Cache layouts differ in the L2 tier. Both parts share 80 KB of L1 per core and 36 MB of shared L3, but the 251TE carries 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the i9-14901E carries 2 MB per core. The i9-14901E therefore has more total L2 cache (16 MB versus 30 MB for the 251TE across all cores), which likely contributes to its single-thread advantage. Die size also differs: the 251TE measures 215 mm², while the i9-14901E is larger at 257 mm², reflecting the different core layout and integrated components.

Thermal design power further separates them. The 251TE has a 45 W TDP, while the i9-14901E has a 65 W TDP. The higher TDP of the i9-14901E supports its higher base clock of 2.80 GHz versus 1.40 GHz and boost clock of 5.60 GHz versus 5.40 GHz. Both processors support DDR4 and DDR5 memory on a dual-channel bus, and both enable ECC memory. The 251TE records a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the i9-14901E has no recorded bandwidth figure in the database. Both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes and integrate UHD Graphics 770. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both are active production parts.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core i9-14901E has 8 cores and 16 threads. The 251TE offers triple the cores and double the threads.

Q: Why does the i9-14901E win single-thread tests despite having fewer cores?

A: The i9-14901E has a higher base clock (2.80 GHz versus 1.40 GHz) and a higher boost clock (5.60 GHz versus 5.40 GHz). It also has 2 MB of L2 cache per core versus 1.25 MB on the 251TE. These factors contribute to its 18.1% lead in PassMark single-thread performance.

Q: Which processor is better for data compression workloads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE is substantially better, winning PassMark data compression by 15.8% (334399 versus 288777). It also wins data encryption by 19.4% (22176 versus 18571), indicating a strong advantage in parallel data manipulation.

Q: How do the Cinebench multi-core scores compare?

A: The i9-14901E edges out the 251TE in all Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i9-14901E scores 25753 versus 25518 for the 251TE, a 0.9% difference. The same 0.9% margin appears in R15 (2595 versus 2572) and R20 (10816 versus 10717).

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference?

A: The 251TE has an average benchmark score of 41650, while the i9-14901E has 37911. This places the 251TE at the 88th percentile of all CPUs and the i9-14901E at the 86th percentile.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory and PCIe features?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus, both enable ECC memory, and both use PCIe Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The 251TE records 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the i9-14901E has no recorded bandwidth figure.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Core count: 24 cores for the 251TE versus 8 cores for the i9-14901E. Thread count: 32 versus 16. Base clock: 1.40 GHz versus 2.80 GHz. Boost clock: 5.40 GHz versus 5.60 GHz. TDP: 45 W versus 65 W. Codename: Bartlett Lake versus Raptor Lake-R. Generation: "Core 7 (Bartlett Lake)" versus "Core i9 (Raptor Lake Refresh)". Die size: 215 mm² versus 257 mm². L2 cache per core: 1.25 MB versus 2 MB. Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s recorded for the 251TE, no value recorded for the i9-14901E. Release date: 2025-01-12 for the 251TE versus 2024-06-30 for the i9-14901E. Launch MSRP: $384 for the 251TE, no value recorded for the i9-14901E. Part numbers also differ: SRQAXQ5ZG versus Q49ESRNJH.

Shared specifications include the 10 nm process node, Intel foundry, Intel Socket 1700, 80 KB L1 per core, 36 MB shared L3, DDR4/DDR5 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes, UHD Graphics 770 integrated graphics, Desktop market segment, Active production status, and locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The i9-14901E dominates the Cinebench suite with consistent, albeit small, margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2595 versus 2572 for the 251TE, a 0.9% win. Single-core R15 shows 366 versus 362, a 1.1% win. R20 multi-core delivers 10816 versus 10717 (0.9%), and R20 single-core gives 1526 versus 1512 (0.9%). R23 multi-core follows the same pattern: 25753 versus 25518 (0.9%), and R23 single-core is 3635 versus 3602 (0.9%). PassMark multithread also favors the i9-14901E by 0.9% (30298 versus 30022).

The 251TE counters with larger wins in PassMark data-oriented tests. Data compression shows 334399 versus 288777, a 15.8% advantage. Data encryption delivers 22176 versus 18571, a 19.4% advantage. Integer math yields 125739 versus 112736, an 11.5% win. Floating-point math provides 85607 versus 81089, a 5.6% win. Random string sorting goes to the 251TE by 1.3% (39643 versus 39138). The i9-14901E wins extended instructions by 1.6% (17249 versus 16974), prime number finding by 25.9% (189 versus 140), physics by 36.3% (3041 versus 1938), and single-thread by 18.1% (4354 versus 3568).

The largest single delta is the i9-14901E's 36.3% win in PassMark physics, which indicates a massive advantage in simulation-style workloads. The largest 251TE win is 19.4% in data encryption. The 251TE wins 5 tests, while the i9-14901E wins 12 tests, but the 251TE's average benchmark score remains higher (41650 versus 37911), suggesting its wins carry more weight in the overall metric.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins in parallel data processing, specifically where high core counts translate directly into throughput. PassMark data compression (15.8% lead) and data encryption (19.4% lead) are its strongest areas, followed by integer math (11.5%) and floating-point math (5.6%). These results indicate the 24-core, 32-thread configuration excels at batch operations on large datasets, such as file archiving, database workloads, and cryptographic processing. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth provides ample data flow for these tasks, and its 36 MB shared L3 cache supports multi-threaded access patterns.

The Intel Core i9-14901E wins in single-threaded and physics-dominated workloads. Its 18.1% lead in PassMark single-thread performance, 36.3% lead in physics, and 25.9% lead in prime number finding point to strengths in interactive applications, physics engines, and mathematical computations that rely on per-core speed. Its higher base clock (2.80 GHz) and boost clock (5.60 GHz) drive these results, as does its larger 2 MB L2 cache per core. The i9-14901E also holds narrow wins in all Cinebench multi-core tests (0.9%), meaning it remains viable for rendering despite its 8-core layout, likely due to its higher clock speeds and efficient Raptor Lake architecture.

The recorded data supports a clear split: the 251TE for data-heavy parallel tasks, the i9-14901E for latency-sensitive and physics-heavy single-thread work. The 251TE's 88th percentile ranking versus the i9-14901E's 86th percentile, combined with its higher average score, suggests it is the more balanced processor overall, but the i9-14901E's decisive wins in specific categories make it indispensable for certain use cases. Both parts remain active in production, each serving a distinct workload profile on the same socket.