Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 225F Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits these two desktop processors into distinct performance profiles. The Intel Core 7 251TE takes 6 of the 17 head-to-head tests, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F wins 11. The most dramatic gap appears in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the Core 7 251TE scores 3602 against 1893 for the Ultra 5 225F, a 90.3% advantage. That is the largest delta in the entire comparison. The Core 7 also leads Cinebench R23 multi-core by 55%, posting 25518 versus 16467.

The Ultra 5 225F counters in PassMark single-thread, where it scores 4397 against 3568, a 18.9% lead. The same margin repeats for the duplicate passmark_singlethread entry. In extended instructions, the Ultra 5 225F dominates with 28027 versus 16974, a 39.4% advantage. Prime number searching also favors the Ultra 5 225F heavily: 352 versus 140, a 60.2% lead. Floating-point math goes to the Ultra 5 225F at 92554 against 85607, a 7.5% margin.

The multi-core Cinebench results are not uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the Ultra 5 225F wins 2660 to 2572, a 3.3% edge. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the Ultra 5 225F wins again, 11059 to 10717, a 3.1% margin. But Cinebench R23 multi-core flips decisively to the Core 7 251TE. That 55% swing suggests the older Bartlett Lake part scales better under the longer, heavier R23 workload.

Integer math is another Core 7 strength. The Core 7 251TE scores 125739 against 66417, an 89.3% lead. Data compression favors the Core 7 251TE by 7.6%, 334399 to 310843. Random string sorting also goes to the Core 7 251TE, 39643 to 37325, a 6.2% margin. Data encryption is close, with the Ultra 5 225F ahead by 2.1%, 22648 to 22176. PassMark multi-thread shows a narrow Ultra 5 225F win, 31004 to 30022, a 3.2% gap, and PassMark physics gives the Ultra 5 225F a 20.2% lead, 2430 to 1938.

The average benchmark score tells a different story from the individual wins. The Core 7 251TE averages 41650 and sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Ultra 5 225F averages 37313, at the 85th percentile. The Core 7 251TE's nearest rival is the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H at 41621, a delta of 0.1%, meaning the two are effectively tied in aggregate. The Intel Core i7-14650HX trails by 0.2%, and the Intel Core i7-14700T leads by 0.6%. The Ultra 5 225F's nearest rival is the Intel Core i9-13900HK at 37425, which beats it by 0.3%. AMD Ryzen 7 7735H trails by 0.4%, and both the Intel Core i7-13700 and AMD Ryzen 7 160 trail by 0.5%.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 251TE is the clear winner for workloads that scale with core count and demand high sustained multi-thread throughput. Its 24 cores and 32 threads power the Cinebench R23 multi-core victory, the 89.3% integer math lead, and the data compression advantage. It also leads in random string sorting, which reflects strong memory-side throughput for that task. The Cinebench R23 single-core result, 90.3% ahead, is notable because it contradicts the PassMark single-thread result, indicating the Core 7 251TE's architecture responds particularly well to the R23 instruction mix.

The Ultra 5 225F wins in lighter multi-thread workloads. Cinebench R15 and R20 multi-core both favor it, as does PassMark multi-thread. The 20.2% physics lead and the 7.5% floating-point math win point toward better per-core efficiency in those tests. The 18.9% PassMark single-thread lead is substantial, and the 39.4% extended instructions advantage shows a strong SIMD or specialized instruction path. Prime number finding at 60.2% ahead is the largest Ultra 5 225F win outside of the multi-core Cinebench tests.

The split is essentially about thread scaling versus per-core efficiency. The Core 7 251TE uses its 24 cores to crush integer-heavy and compression-heavy tasks. The Ultra 5 225F, with only 10 cores and 10 threads, relies on higher single-thread performance and better efficiency in floating-point, encryption, and instruction-heavy workloads. Data encryption is nearly a tie, with the Ultra 5 225F ahead by just 2.1%, so that category offers no clear separator.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel foundry and design strategies. The Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process from Intel, with a die size of 215 mm². The Ultra 5 225F uses Arrow Lake-S architecture on a 3 nm process from TSMC, with a die size of 243 mm² and 17,800 million transistors. The Core 7 251TE has no listed transistor count, but the die size difference is modest at 28 mm².

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Ultra 5 225F has no hyper-threading, which explains its thread count matching its core count. The Core 7 251TE runs at a base clock of 1.40 GHz and boosts to 5.40 GHz. The Ultra 5 225F has a higher base clock of 3.30 GHz but a lower boost clock of 4.90 GHz. The higher base clock on the Ultra 5 225F helps explain its PassMark single-thread lead, while the Core 7 251TE's higher boost clock and many more threads drive its multi-core wins.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 251TE has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 225F has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 20 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 225F has larger per-core caches, which supports its per-thread efficiency, but the Core 7 251TE has nearly double the total L3 capacity, which helps in multi-threaded shared-data scenarios.

Memory support differs. The Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Ultra 5 225F supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 7 251TE supports ECC memory; the Ultra 5 225F does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the Core 7 251TE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 225F provides Gen 5 with 20 CPU lanes.

The Core 7 251TE includes integrated UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 5 225F has no integrated graphics. The sockets are different as well: the Core 7 251TE uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra 5 225F uses Intel Socket 1851. The Core 7 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Ultra 5 225F has a TDP of 65 watts. The Core 7 251TE launched on 2025-01-12, and the Ultra 5 225F launched on 2025-01-06. The Core 7 251TE has a launch MSRP of $384. The Ultra 5 225F has a launch MSRP of $231. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 7 251TE belongs to the Core 7 (Bartlett Lake) generation, while the Ultra 5 225F belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with Arrow Lake architecture.

The Verdict

The data indicates two different design philosophies with clear workload implications. The Core 7 251TE is the aggregate leader, with an average benchmark score of 41650 versus 37313 for the Ultra 5 225F, and a higher percentile ranking of 88 versus 85. Its 24-core, 32-thread configuration delivers decisive wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core, integer math, data compression, and random string sorting. For workloads that can use many threads, especially integer-heavy or compression-driven tasks, the Core 7 251TE is the stronger choice. Its 55% Cinebench R23 multi-core lead over the Ultra 5 225F is the single most important multi-threaded result in this comparison.

The Ultra 5 225F is the better pick for single-thread-sensitive and efficiency-bound tasks. Its 18.9% PassMark single-thread lead, 39.4% extended instructions advantage, and 60.2% prime number finding win show that its 10 cores are individually faster. The 20.2% physics lead and 7.5% floating-point math win reinforce that pattern. The Ultra 5 225F also uses a newer 3 nm TSMC process, supports more PCIe lanes at 20 versus 16, and has a higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s against 89.6 GB/s. It lacks ECC support and integrated graphics, so those features on the Core 7 251TE matter for users who need them.

The data does not support a universal winner. The Core 7 251TE wins the aggregate benchmark average and the Cinebench R23 tests, while the Ultra 5 225F wins more individual tests overall, 11 to 6. The Core 7 251TE fits workloads that scale across many threads and benefit from 36 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 225F fits workloads that favor per-core speed, newer process efficiency, and higher memory bandwidth. The launch MSRP difference is substantial, but the performance profiles are distinct enough that the choice depends entirely on the target software mix.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has 10 cores and 10 threads.

Q: Which processor wins Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 25518 against 16467 for the Intel Core Ultra 5 225F, a 55% lead.

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score in PassMark?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F leads PassMark single-thread with 4397 against 3568 for the Intel Core 7 251TE, an 18.9% advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has a memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s, while the Intel Core 7 251TE has 89.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 5 225F supports only DDR5.

Q: Does either processor support ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 7 251TE supports ECC memory. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F does not.

Q: What are the aggregate benchmark scores?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has an average benchmark score of 41650, at the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core Ultra 5 225F has an average benchmark score of 37313, at the 85th percentile.