Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 226V Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents a decisive benchmark landscape. The Intel Core 7 251TE wins 14 of the 17 head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 226V takes only 3. The magnitude of many victories is substantial, indicating fundamentally different performance profiles.

Multi-threaded workloads show the largest gap. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the Core 7 251TE scores 25518 against 9848 for the Core Ultra 5 226V, a delta of 159.1%. Cinebench R20 multicore shows 10717 versus 6381, a 68% advantage. Cinebench R15 multicore delivers 2572 versus 1501, a 71.4% lead. The pattern persists in PassMark multithread testing: 30022 versus 17850, a 68.2% difference.

The integer math test reveals the most extreme divergence. The Core 7 251TE records 125739, while the Core Ultra 5 226V manages 38647. That represents a 225.4% advantage for the desktop part. Floating point math also favors the Core 7 251TE at 85607 versus 52270, a 63.8% margin.

Data compression and encryption workloads follow the same trend. PassMark data compression shows 334399 for the Core 7 251TE against 170687 for the Core Ultra 5 226V, a 95.9% difference. Data encryption delivers 22176 versus 12710, a 74.5% gap. Random string sorting favors the Core 7 251TE at 39643 versus 20813, a 90.5% delta.

Single-core performance tells a more nuanced story. The Core 7 251TE wins all three Cinebench single-core tests: R15 at 362 versus 267 (35.6%), R20 at 1512 versus 900 (68%), and R23 at 3602 versus 1744 (106.5%). However, PassMark single-thread testing flips the result. The Core Ultra 5 226V scores 3754, while the Core 7 251TE scores 3568, a 5% advantage for the mobile chip. This anomaly suggests the two processors handle PassMark's specific single-thread workload differently than Cinebench's.

The Core Ultra 5 226V also wins PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 166 against 140, a 15.7% margin. Extended instructions is the closest contest: the Core 7 251TE leads 16974 to 14724, only 15.3% ahead.

Average benchmark scores place these chips in different performance tiers. The Core 7 251TE records an average score of 41650, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H at 41621 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i7-14650HX at 41576 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-12850HX at 41779 (0.3% ahead). The Core Ultra 5 226V averages 19368, sitting in the 73rd percentile. Its closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 5 7533HS at 19364, the Intel Core i5-1345U at 19411 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i7-8700K at 19238 (0.7% behind), and the Intel Core i7-10700F at 19499 (0.7% ahead).

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE averages 41650, more than double the Core Ultra 5 226V's 19368. The desktop chip ranks in the 88th percentile of all CPUs, while the mobile chip ranks in the 73rd.

Q: Does the Core Ultra 5 226V win any benchmark comparisons?

A: Yes, it wins three: PassMark single-thread (3754 versus 3568, a 5% margin), PassMark find prime numbers (166 versus 140, a 15.7% margin), and the duplicate PassMark singlethread test with identical scores.

Q: How large is the Cinebench R23 multicore gap?

A: The Core 7 251TE scores 25518, which is 159.1% higher than the Core Ultra 5 226V's 9848. This is the largest percentage difference in any Cinebench test between the two.

Q: What do the nearest rival comparisons show for each chip?

A: The Core 7 251TE sits within 0.6% of four rivals: the Core Ultra 7 265H, Core i7-14650HX, Core i7-12850HX, and Core i7-14700T. The Core Ultra 5 226V sits within 0.7% of the Ryzen 5 7533HS, Core i5-1345U, Core i7-8700K, and Core i7-10700F.

Q: Which chip has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 7 251TE boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 226V boosts to 4.50 GHz. The Core 7 251TE also has a lower base clock at 1.40 GHz compared to 2.10 GHz.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare?

A: The Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Core Ultra 5 226V has 8 cores and 8 threads. This 16-core and 24-thread difference explains much of the multi-threaded benchmark dominance.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data supports a clear workload split. The Core 7 251TE dominates in any test that scales with core count, cache size, or memory bandwidth. Its 24 cores and 32 threads drive multi-threaded Cinebench scores that are 68% to 159.1% higher. Data compression, encryption, integer math, floating point math, and random string sorting all favor the Core 7 251TE by margins ranging from 15.3% to 225.4%. Physics simulation also leans heavily toward the desktop chip, with a 33.7% advantage.

The Core Ultra 5 226V wins in two narrow categories. Its PassMark single-thread score of 3754 edges out the Core 7 251TE's 3568, a 5% advantage. Prime number finding also favors the mobile chip, 166 versus 140. These wins suggest the Lunar Lake architecture handles certain latency-sensitive or branch-heavy single-thread workloads more efficiently, despite losing all three Cinebench single-core tests by substantial margins.

For workloads that involve heavy parallel processing, the Core 7 251TE is the clear choice based on the recorded data. For lightweight single-thread tasks that resemble PassMark's single-thread test, the Core Ultra 5 226V shows a measurable edge. The extended instructions test is the closest overall contest, with the Core 7 251TE leading by only 15.3%, indicating near-parity in vectorized instruction throughput.

Specification Differences

The two processors occupy different market segments. The Core 7 251TE is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700 with a 45 W TDP. The Core Ultra 5 226V is a mobile part on Intel BGA 2833 with a 17 W TDP. The desktop chip was released on 2025-01-12, while the mobile chip appeared earlier on 2024-09-23.

Memory support differs significantly. The Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. It also supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 5 226V's memory support is listed as dependent on the motherboard, with dual-channel operation but no bandwidth figure recorded and no ECC support.

PCIe lane allocation favors the desktop chip. The Core 7 251TE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 5 226V provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics differ: the Core 7 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 226V uses Arc 130V. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 251TE is $384. No launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 5 226V. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The fabrication and design approaches diverge sharply. The Core 7 251TE uses Bartlett Lake on Intel's 10 nm process with a 215 mm² die size, manufactured by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 226V uses Lunar Lake architecture on TSMC's 3 nm process; no die size is recorded. The 3 nm node provides a transistor density advantage that helps explain the Core Ultra 5 226V's competitive single-thread PassMark score despite its far lower power envelope.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 7 251TE allocates 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 226V allocates 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The per-core cache figures are higher on the Lunar Lake chip, but the total L3 cache is 28 MB smaller.

Core counts drive the architectural story. The Core 7 251TE's 24 cores and 32 threads indicate a hybrid arrangement typical of Bartlett Lake desktop parts. The Core Ultra 5 226V's 8 cores and 8 threads reflect Lunar Lake's efficiency-focused design, prioritizing per-core performance and power efficiency over raw thread count. The boost clocks reinforce this: 5.40 GHz for the Core 7 251TE versus 4.50 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 226V, yet the mobile chip still loses all Cinebench single-core tests.

The production status for both is Active. The Core 7 251TE's part number is SRQAXQ5ZG, and the Core Ultra 5 226V's is SRPMQSRPMR.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Core 7 251TE is the superior processor for multi-threaded and most single-threaded workloads. Its 159.1% lead in Cinebench R23 multicore, 225.4% lead in integer math, and 95.9% lead in data compression make it the stronger choice for rendering, scientific computing, and data-heavy tasks. The 88th percentile ranking and average score of 41650 place it firmly in a higher performance class than the Core Ultra 5 226V's 73rd percentile and 19368 average.

The Core Ultra 5 226V offers specific advantages that the data confirms. Its 5% PassMark single-thread win and 15.7% prime number win indicate superior efficiency in narrowly defined workloads. The 17 W TDP, compared to 45 W for the Core 7 251TE, suggests the mobile chip is designed for power-constrained environments. The 3 nm TSMC process and larger per-core caches (192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2) support this efficiency focus.

The choice depends on the workload profile. For desktop users running parallel, cache-heavy applications, the Core 7 251TE delivers dramatically higher throughput. For mobile users prioritizing single-thread responsiveness in specific tasks, the Core Ultra 5 226V holds a measurable, if narrow, edge. The 14-to-3 win count in head-to-head benchmarks favors the Core 7 251TE, but the Core Ultra 5 226V's wins are not trivial: they appear in tests where the desktop chip cannot match the mobile architecture's efficiency per thread.