Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra 5 245T Comparison

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 Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Core 7 251TE does not use simultaneous multithreading, so its thread count equals its core count.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23 multi-core performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 26208 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, which is 2.6% ahead of the Intel Core 7 251TE's 25518. This is a narrow margin despite the Core 7 251TE having 10 more cores.

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 245T boosts to 5.10 GHz. The Core 7 251TE also has a lower base clock of 1.40 GHz versus 2.20 GHz for the Core Ultra 5 245T.

Q: What are the process nodes for each chip?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE uses a 10 nm process at Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T uses a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245T also has a larger die at 243 mm² versus 215 mm² for the Core 7 251TE.

Q: Which processor wins in PassMark single-thread performance?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T scores 4367 in PassMark single-thread, which is 18.3% higher than the Intel Core 7 251TE's 3568. This is one of the largest single-test advantages in the comparison.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory, but the Core Ultra 5 245T has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins 3 of the 17 head-to-head benchmarks, and those wins are concentrated in specific workload types. Its biggest victory is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 125739 versus 88676, a 41.8% advantage. This indicates strong performance in integer-heavy computation, which often appears in database work, financial modeling, and general productivity software. It also wins in data compression with a score of 334399 versus 283812, a 17.8% lead, and in random string sorting with 39643 versus 34931, a 13.5% lead. These three wins share a common theme: the Core 7 251TE handles serialized, data-manipulation tasks with many parallel threads better than the Core Ultra 5 245T.

The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins the remaining 14 benchmarks. Its victories span both single-thread and multi-thread workloads. The most dramatic wins come in PassMark find prime numbers (324 versus 140, a 56.8% lead) and extended instructions (22071 versus 16974, a 23.1% lead). It also dominates floating point math with 108499 versus 85607, a 21.1% lead. In rendering workloads, all three Cinebench versions (R15, R20, R23) show the Core Ultra 5 245T ahead by roughly 2.6% in both single-core and multi-core tests. The data suggests the Core Ultra 5 245T is the better all-round performer, while the Core 7 251TE is specialized for certain integer and sorting workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families. The Intel Core 7 251TE uses Bartlett Lake on a 10 nm process at Intel, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 245T uses Arrow Lake-S on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core Ultra 5 245T is part of the Core Ultra Series 2 and uses the Arrow Lake architecture. This is a fundamental split: Bartlett Lake is an older process node with a larger, less dense design, while Arrow Lake-S is built on a leading-edge 3 nm node.

The transistor counts differ dramatically. The Core Ultra 5 245T packs 17,800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die. The Core 7 251TE has no listed transistor count but uses a smaller 215 mm² die on a less advanced 10 nm process. The Core Ultra 5 245T's higher transistor density on 3 nm explains how it achieves competitive multi-thread scores despite having only 14 cores versus 24.

Cache hierarchies are also different. The Core 7 251TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 5 245T has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 245T has larger per-core caches, while the Core 7 251TE has more total L3 cache.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 7 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 5 245T uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. The Core Ultra 5 245T also supports more PCIe lanes: Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Core 7 251TE. Both support ECC memory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification field. The Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Core Ultra 5 245T has 14 cores and 14 threads. The Core 7 251TE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the Core Ultra 5 245T has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz. The Core 7 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Core Ultra 5 245T has a TDP of 65 watts.

Sockets are incompatible: the Core 7 251TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 5 245T uses Intel Socket 1851. Process nodes differ as noted, and foundries differ: Intel for Bartlett Lake, TSMC for Arrow Lake-S. The Core Ultra 5 245T has a die size of 243 mm² versus 215 mm² for the Core 7 251TE.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. The Core 7 251TE has 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 36 MB shared L3. The Core Ultra 5 245T has 192 KB L1 per core, 3 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: the Core 7 251TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 5 245T supports DDR5 only. Memory bandwidth is higher on the Core Ultra 5 245T at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s.

PCIe support differs: the Core 7 251TE has Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 5 245T has Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics differ, as do release dates: the Core 7 251TE released on 2025-01-12, while the Core Ultra 5 245T released on 2025-01-06. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 251TE is $384. The launch MSRP for the Core Ultra 5 245T is $270. Both processors are active production parts, both are desktop segments, both support ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single advantage in the entire comparison belongs to the Core Ultra 5 245T in PassMark find prime numbers. Its score of 324 is 56.8% higher than the Core 7 251TE's 140. This is a massive gap in a math-heavy test that stresses integer operations and memory latency. The Core Ultra 5 245T also dominates in extended instructions with 22071 versus 16974, a 23.1% lead, and in floating point math with 108499 versus 85607, a 21.1% lead. These three PassMark tests show the Core Ultra 5 245T's per-core efficiency advantage, which comes from its newer 3 nm process and larger per-core caches.

The Core 7 251TE's biggest win is in PassMark integer math, where it scores 125739 versus 88676, a 41.8% lead. This is the largest margin for either processor in the entire dataset. The Core 7 251TE also wins data compression with 334399 versus 283812, a 17.8% lead, and random string sorting with 39643 versus 34931, a 13.5% lead. These wins suggest the Core 7 251TE's 24 cores and 32 threads are highly effective for workloads that scale well with thread count and involve data movement.

In Cinebench tests, the Core Ultra 5 245T wins every variant by a consistent margin. Cinebench R15 multi-core: 2641 versus 2572, a 2.6% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core: 372 versus 362, a 2.7% lead. Cinebench R20 multi-core: 11007 versus 10717, a 2.6% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core: 1553 versus 1512, a 2.6% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core: 26208 versus 25518, a 2.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core: 3699 versus 3602, a 2.6% lead. The consistency of this 2.6% margin across all six Cinebench tests indicates a stable architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

PassMark multithread shows a smaller gap: 30833 versus 30022, a 2.6% lead for the Core Ultra 5 245T. PassMark data encryption also favors the Core Ultra 5 245T with 23656 versus 22176, a 6.3% lead. PassMark physics favors the Core Ultra 5 245T with 2278 versus 1938, a 14.9% lead. PassMark single-thread shows the Core Ultra 5 245T ahead with 4367 versus 3568, an 18.3% lead. The single-thread gap is notable because the Core 7 251TE has a higher boost clock of 5.40 GHz versus 5.10 GHz, yet the Core Ultra 5 245T still wins by a wide margin, indicating the Arrow Lake architecture extracts more instructions per clock.

The average benchmark scores differ significantly. The Core 7 251TE has an average benchmark score of 41650 and sits at the 88th percentile of all CPUs. The Core Ultra 5 245T has an average benchmark score of 38194 and sits at the 86th percentile. Despite the Core Ultra 5 245T winning 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, its average score is lower because the Core 7 251TE's massive 41.8% win in integer math and 17.8% win in data compression pull its average up. The Core 7 251TE's nearest rivals include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H at 41621, which is 0.1% behind, and the Intel Core i7-14700T at 41914, which is 0.6% ahead. The Core Ultra 5 245T's nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 7 250 at 38221, which is 0.1% ahead, and the Intel Core i5-13600KF at 38103, which is 0.2% behind.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors with different strengths for different workloads. The Intel Core Ultra 5 245T wins 14 of 17 benchmarks and leads in every Cinebench test, all PassMark math tests, single-thread performance, data encryption, physics, and multithread performance. It is the better general-purpose processor. Its 18.3% lead in single-thread performance and 21.1% lead in floating point math make it the preferred choice for applications that rely on per-core speed, such as office productivity, web browsing, and lightly threaded creative software.

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins only 3 benchmarks, but its wins are substantial. The 41.8% lead in integer math and 17.8% lead in data compression indicate that workloads which can fully utilize 24 cores and 32 threads will see a significant advantage. This points toward batch processing, data transformation pipelines, and certain scientific computing tasks. The Core 7 251TE also has a lower TDP of 45 watts versus 65 watts, which matters for systems with tighter thermal budgets.

The average benchmark scores complicate the picture. The Core 7 251TE has a higher average benchmark score of 41650 versus 38194, and a higher percentile ranking of 88 versus 86. This is driven by its large wins in integer math and data compression, which are weighted equally with all other tests in the average. Users who prioritize those specific workloads should consider the Core 7 251TE despite its fewer benchmark wins.

The Core Ultra 5 245T has the advantage in platform features. It supports PCIe Gen 5 with 20 lanes versus 16, has higher memory bandwidth at 102.4 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s, and uses the newer Socket 1851 platform. It also has a larger L1 cache per core at 192 KB versus 80 KB and larger L2 cache per core at 3 MB versus 1.25 MB. The Core 7 251TE counters with more shared L3 cache at 36 MB versus 24 MB and support for DDR4 memory, which can be beneficial for users upgrading existing systems without replacing memory.

The Core Ultra 5 245T has a lower launch MSRP of $270 versus $384 for the Core 7 251TE. It also has the newer Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU integrated GPU versus the UHD Graphics 770 in the Core 7 251TE.

For rendering workloads, the Core Ultra 5 245T is the clear choice, with all Cinebench tests showing at least a 2.6% lead despite having 10 fewer cores. For data-heavy integer workloads, the Core 7 251TE is the clear choice, with its 41.8% integer math advantage. For general desktop use, mixed workloads, and single-threaded applications, the benchmark data favors the Core Ultra 5 245T. The Core 7 251TE is a specialized tool for parallel integer processing, while the Core Ultra 5 245T is the more balanced processor.