Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 235 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data divides these two processors into distinct performance camps. The Intel Core 7 251TE dominates the Cinebench suite, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 counters with a broad set of Passmark wins. Across the 17 recorded tests, the Core Ultra 5 235 takes 10 wins, while the Core 7 251TE claims 7.

The Core 7 251TE's most decisive victories come in Cinebench. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 2572 versus 1488 for the Core Ultra 5 235, a 72.8% advantage. The single-core R15 test shows a nearly identical gap: 362 against 210, also a 72.8% delta. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore (10717 vs 6202, 72.8% ahead), R20 single-core (1512 vs 875, 72.8% ahead), R23 multicore (25518 vs 14769, 72.8% ahead), and R23 single-core (3602 vs 2085, 72.8% ahead). The consistency of the 72.8% delta across all six Cinebench tests suggests a fundamental architectural scaling difference, not a workload-specific quirk.

The only other Cinebench-era win for the Core 7 251TE comes in Passmark integer math, where it posts 125739 against the Core Ultra 5 235's 87948, a 43% margin. This integer math result shows the Core 7 251TE's strength in serialized computational tasks that do not rely on the newer instruction sets.

The Core Ultra 5 235, by contrast, wins every remaining Passmark test. Its largest margin is in find prime numbers, scoring 371 versus 140, a 62.3% lead. The extended instructions test shows a 48.2% advantage (32752 vs 16974). Floating point math goes to the Core Ultra 5 235 at 117951 versus 85607, a 27.4% lead. Data encryption favors the Core Ultra 5 235 at 29293 versus 22176, a 24.3% edge. The physics test shows 2570 against 1938, a 24.6% advantage. Multithread performance goes to the Core Ultra 5 235 at 37816 versus 30022, a 20.6% margin. Single-thread performance also favors the Core Ultra 5 235 at 4516 versus 3568, a 21% lead. Data compression yields 390711 versus 334399, a 14.4% win, and random string sorting closes the list at 48980 versus 39643, a 19.1% margin.

The average benchmark score reflects this split: the Core Ultra 5 235 averages 46062, while the Core 7 251TE averages 41650. The Core Ultra 5 235 sits at the 89th percentile of all CPUs, one point higher than the Core 7 251TE's 88th percentile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE boosts to 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 235 boosts to 5.00 GHz.

Q: Does the Intel Core 7 251TE support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes. The Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, whereas the Core Ultra 5 235 supports DDR5 only.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores and 14 threads.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The Core Ultra 5 235 delivers 102.4 GB/s, while the Core 7 251TE delivers 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 7 251TE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 235 has 24 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 7 251TE supports ECC memory, but the Core Ultra 5 235 does not.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel product lines and foundries. The Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process by Intel. The Core Ultra 5 235 uses the Arrow Lake-S codename and is fabricated by TSMC on a 3 nm node. The die size differs: the Core 7 251TE measures 215 mm², while the Core Ultra 5 235 measures 243 mm² and contains 17,800 million transistors.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 251TE packs 24 cores and 32 threads, indicating hyperthreading capability. The Core Ultra 5 235 has 14 cores and 14 threads, with no hyperthreading. Per-core cache allocations also differ. The Core 7 251TE has 80 KB of L1 and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, while the Core Ultra 5 235 has 192 KB of L1 and 3 MB of L2 per core. The L3 cache goes the other direction: 36 MB shared on the Core 7 251TE versus 24 MB shared on the Core Ultra 5 235.

The memory subsystems differ in several ways. The Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 5 235 supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, but with higher bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is present on the Core 7 251TE, absent on the Core Ultra 5 235.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 7 251TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core Ultra 5 235 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU. The integrated graphics are different as well: UHD Graphics 770 on the Core 7 251TE versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU on the Core Ultra 5 235.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 7 251TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 235 uses Intel Socket 1851. The base clock is also lower on the Core 7 251TE at 1.40 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, though its boost clock is higher at 5.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. The Core 7 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 235 has a TDP of 65 watts. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors with opposite strengths. The Intel Core 7 251TE is the clear choice for Cinebench-style rendering workloads. Its 72.8% lead in every Cinebench test, from R15 through R23, single-core and multi-core alike, is a dominant margin. The 24 cores and 32 threads, combined with the larger 36 MB L3 cache, clearly serve multithreaded rendering tasks. Its 43% lead in integer math further indicates strength in traditional CPU computation.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 is the better all-round performer in Passmark workloads. It wins 10 of 17 head-to-head tests, including data compression, encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. Its average benchmark score of 46062 exceeds the Core 7 251TE's 41650 by roughly 10.6%, and it sits at the 89th percentile versus the 88th percentile. The higher memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s and the newer 3 nm TSMC process likely contribute to its Passmark advantages.

For users running Cinebench-heavy workloads, the Core 7 251TE delivers an unambiguous win. For users whose tasks resemble Passmark's mix of compression, encryption, and floating point math, the Core Ultra 5 235 is the better performer. The single-thread advantage of 21% on the Core Ultra 5 235 also favors applications that are not fully parallelized. The choice depends entirely on whether the workload is rendering-centric or general-purpose.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, compared to 14 cores and 14 threads on the Core Ultra 5 235. Base clocks are 1.40 GHz versus 3.40 GHz, while boost clocks are 5.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. TDP is 45 watts versus 65 watts.

The socket changes from Intel Socket 1700 to Intel Socket 1851. The codename is Bartlett Lake for the Core 7 251TE and Arrow Lake-S for the Core Ultra 5 235. The process node is 10 nm from Intel for the former and 3 nm from TSMC for the latter. Die size is 215 mm² versus 243 mm², with the Core Ultra 5 235 carrying 17,800 million transistors.

Cache layouts differ per core and in total L3. The Core 7 251TE has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core, plus 36 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 235 has 192 KB L1 and 3 MB L2 per core, plus 24 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR4 and DDR5 on the Core 7 251TE versus DDR5 only on the Core Ultra 5 235. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. ECC memory is available only on the Core 7 251TE.

PCIe lanes from the CPU are 16 on the Core 7 251TE and 20 on the Core Ultra 5 235, both Gen 5. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 24EU. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 251TE is $384, and for the Core Ultra 5 235 it is $257. The Core 7 251TE released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra 5 235 released on 2025-01-06.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, both single-core and multi-core. It also wins Passmark integer math. These are workloads that stress traditional CPU rendering pipelines and serial integer operations. The 72.8% lead across all Cinebench versions indicates a consistent architectural advantage for this specific benchmark family. The 43% integer math lead reinforces this pattern.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 235 wins in data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, find prime numbers, floating point math, multithread, physics, random string sorting, and single-thread tests. These wins span a wider range of computational patterns. The find prime numbers test shows a 62.3% lead, indicating strong performance in modular arithmetic and bitwise operations. The extended instructions test shows a 48.2% lead, suggesting better support for newer instruction set extensions. The floating point math lead of 27.4% points to stronger FPU throughput.

The multithread win for the Core Ultra 5 235 is notable given its lower core count. The Core Ultra 5 235 scores 37816 versus 30022 in Passmark multithread, a 20.6% advantage, despite having only 14 cores versus 24. This suggests the Core Ultra 5 235's per-thread efficiency is substantially higher. The single-thread score of 4516 versus 3568 confirms this, with a 21% lead in single-thread performance.

In practical terms, the Core 7 251TE is the pick for Cinebench rendering and integer-heavy workloads. The Core Ultra 5 235 is the pick for encryption, compression, floating point math, physics calculations, and any workload that benefits from higher single-thread performance or the newer TSMC process node. The average benchmark score favors the Core Ultra 5 235, and its 89th percentile ranking reflects a broadly stronger profile across the recorded test suite.