Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data presents an unusual comparison scenario. The Intel Core 7 251TE has a complete benchmark profile, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database. This means the head-to-head comparison relies entirely on the 251TE’s measured results and the architectural specifications of both processors. The 251TE’s average benchmark score is 41650, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database. The 155UL sits at the 50th percentile, though its average benchmark score is listed as 0 due to the absence of test data.

Focusing on the 251TE’s recorded results, its Cinebench R23 multi-core score is 25518, while its single-core score is 3602. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 10717 and single-core is 1512. The older Cinebench R15 test shows a multi-core score of 2572 and a single-core score of 362. These scores indicate strong sustained multi-threaded performance, with the R23 multi-core figure being roughly seven times the single-core figure, reflecting the processor’s 24-core, 32-thread configuration.

PassMark results for the 251TE show a multi-thread score of 30022 and a single-thread score of 3568. The integer math score is 125739, floating point math is 85607, and extended instructions score is 16974. Data compression reaches 334399, data encryption is 22176, and random string sorting is 39643. Physics score is 1938, and find prime numbers score is 140. These results paint a picture of a processor that handles both integer-heavy and floating-point-heavy workloads with considerable headroom.

The nearest rivals for the 251TE provide context for its standing. The Intel Core Ultra 7 265H has an average score of 41621, which is 0.1% lower than the 251TE’s 41650. The Intel Core i7-14650HX scores 41576, also 0.2% behind. The Intel Core i7-12850HX scores 41779, which is 0.3% higher than the 251TE, and the Intel Core i7-14700T scores 41914, 0.6% higher. These deltas are all within a single percentage point, indicating that the 251TE performs in a tightly contested band near the top of the database’s rankings. The 88th percentile placement confirms this position.

The 155UL, lacking benchmark scores, cannot be directly compared in any specific test. Its specifications, however, show a 12-core, 14-thread configuration with a base clock of 1.70 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The 251TE has a base clock of 1.40 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The boost clock advantage of 0.60 GHz for the 251TE is substantial, and the core count difference of 12 additional cores and 18 additional threads gives the 251TE a structural advantage in multi-threaded scenarios. The database records no head-to-head benchmark wins for either processor, as no shared tests exist.

The TDP figures differ significantly. The 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the 155UL has a TDP of 15 watts. This is a threefold difference in thermal design power. The 251TE’s higher TDP aligns with its larger core count and higher boost clock, while the 155UL’s lower TDP suggests a focus on power efficiency. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not a factor in their measured or projected performance.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear distinction between these two processors, though the lack of benchmark scores for the 155UL limits the comparison to architectural and specification-based analysis. The 251TE is the higher-performing part based on every measurable metric in the database. Its 88th percentile ranking, average benchmark score of 41650, and complete suite of Cinebench and PassMark results demonstrate a processor that competes with the top-tier parts in the database, including the Core Ultra 7 265H and Core i7-14650HX, both of which trail it by fractional percentage points.

The 155UL’s 50th percentile placement, despite the absence of scores, indicates a mid-range positioning. Its 12 cores and 14 threads are fewer than the 251TE’s 24 cores and 32 threads. The 155UL’s boost clock of 4.80 GHz is lower than the 251TE’s 5.40 GHz. The L3 cache of the 155UL is 12 MB shared, compared to the 251TE’s 36 MB shared. These differences compound into a performance gap that the database’s percentile data reflects: the 251TE sits in the top 12% of all CPUs, while the 155UL sits at the median.

For users selecting between these two, the 251TE is the choice for workloads that demand high multi-threaded throughput. The 155UL is the choice for scenarios where the 15-watt TDP and lower power envelope take precedence over raw performance. The 251TE’s launch MSRP is $384, and the 155UL’s launch MSRP is $426. The 251TE offers a higher core count, higher boost clock, larger L3 cache, and a lower launch MSRP, all while delivering a complete set of benchmark results that place it near the top of the database. The 155UL offers a lower TDP, a smaller physical footprint (implied by its socket and process node), and a newer architecture in Meteor Lake, but no measured performance data to substantiate its capabilities.

Where Each One Wins

The 251TE wins in every category where benchmark data exists. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 25518 indicates strong performance in rendering and video encoding workloads. The PassMark multi-thread score of 30022 supports this, showing robust scaling across its 32 threads. The integer math score of 125739 and floating point math score of 85607 indicate that both general-purpose computing and scientific or financial workloads benefit from the 251TE’s architecture. The data compression score of 334399 suggests that file archiving and compression tasks run efficiently. The encryption score of 22176 shows that cryptographic workloads are handled without significant bottlenecks.

The 251TE’s single-thread performance, with a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 3602 and a PassMark single-thread score of 3568, places it in a strong position for lightly threaded applications such as legacy software or single-threaded games. The boost clock of 5.40 GHz contributes to this, as higher clock speeds directly improve latency-sensitive tasks. The 36 MB shared L3 cache reduces memory access penalties, which benefits workloads that repeatedly access the same data sets.

The 155UL wins in the domain of power efficiency. Its 15-watt TDP is one-third of the 251TE’s 45-watt TDP. This makes the 155UL suitable for compact desktop systems with limited cooling or for always-on machines where energy consumption is a factor. The 155UL’s 7 nm process node, compared to the 251TE’s 10 nm node, indicates a more advanced manufacturing process that contributes to its lower power draw. The 155UL also uses Intel Socket 1851, while the 251TE uses Intel Socket 1700, meaning platform-level differences exist that may influence motherboard selection and system design.

Neither processor has benchmark data for the other’s specific tests, so the 155UL’s performance in rendering, math, or encryption remains unquantified. The architectural specifications, however, suggest that the 155UL’s 12 cores and 14 threads would deliver lower multi-threaded scores than the 251TE’s 24 cores and 32 threads, all else being equal. The 155UL’s L1 cache of 112 KB per core and L2 cache of 2 MB per core are larger than the 251TE’s 80 KB and 1.25 MB per core, which could benefit certain single-threaded or cache-sensitive workloads, but no measured data confirms this.

FAQ

Q: What is the average benchmark score for the Intel Core 7 251TE?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has an average benchmark score of 41650, placing it in the 88th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: Does the Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL have any recorded benchmark scores?

A: No, the database lists no benchmark scores for the Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile placement is 50.

Q: How do the core and thread counts compare between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 24 cores and 32 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL has 12 cores and 14 threads. The 251TE has twice the core count and more than twice the thread count.

Q: What are the boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL has a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The 251TE’s boost clock is 0.60 GHz higher.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL has a TDP of 15 watts. The 155UL consumes one-third the power of the 251TE.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 251TE has 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The 251TE has three times the L3 cache capacity.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ fundamentally in their core architectures and physical designs. The Intel Core 7 251TE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, with a generation listed as Core 7 (Bartlett Lake). It uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The die size is 215 mm². The Intel Core Ultra 7 155UL uses the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS codename, and belongs to the Core Ultra Series 1 generation. It uses a 7 nm process node, also fabricated by Intel. The 155UL does not have a recorded die size in the database.

The 251TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the 155UL supports DDR5 memory that depends on the motherboard configuration. Both processors use a dual-channel memory bus, and both have a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The 251TE supports ECC memory, while the 155UL does not. This makes the 251TE suitable for workstation or server-style applications where error-correcting memory is required.

PCIe capabilities differ. The 251TE supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 155UL supports PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The 251TE’s PCIe Gen 5 support offers double the bandwidth per lane compared to the 155UL’s Gen 4, and the 251TE provides twice the lane count. This gives the 251TE a significant advantage for high-bandwidth devices such as GPUs or NVMe storage.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 251TE uses Intel UHD Graphics 770. The 155UL uses Intel Arc Xe-LPG 64EU. The database does not provide benchmark scores for either integrated graphics solution, so a performance comparison cannot be made from the recorded data. The presence of Arc-branded graphics on the 155UL suggests a newer graphics architecture, but no measured results support a definitive statement.

The 251TE has a TDP of 45 watts and is classified in the Desktop market segment. The 155UL also falls under the Desktop market segment but has a TDP of 15 watts. Both processors are listed as Active in production status. The 251TE was released on 2025-01-12, while the 155UL was released on 2024-04-07. The 251TE’s part number is SRQAXQ5ZG, and the 155UL’s part number is SRN97.

Cache hierarchies reveal additional differences. The 251TE has an L1 cache of 80 KB per core, an L2 cache of 1.25 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 36 MB shared. The 155UL has an L1 cache of 112 KB per core, an L2 cache of 2 MB per core, and an L3 cache of 12 MB shared. The 155UL’s per-core L1 and L2 caches are larger, which could improve per-thread performance in cache-sensitive workloads, but the 251TE’s much larger shared L3 cache benefits overall data sharing across its 24 cores.

The 251TE’s base clock is 1.40 GHz, and its boost clock is 5.40 GHz. The 155UL’s base clock is 1.70 GHz, and its boost clock is 4.80 GHz. The 155UL has a higher base clock by 0.30 GHz, which may help in lightly loaded scenarios, but the 251TE’s higher boost clock and greater core count dominate under sustained load. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so user-controlled overclocking is not available for either part.

The nearest rivals listed for the 251TE include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H with an average score of 41621 and a delta of 0.1%, the Intel Core i7-14650HX at 41576 with a delta of 0.2%, the Intel Core i7-12850HX at 41779 with a delta of -0.3%, and the Intel Core i7-14700T at 41914 with a delta of -0.6%. These rivals all fall within 0.6% of the 251TE’s average score, confirming that the 251TE sits in a dense performance cluster where small score differences separate top-tier parts. The 155UL has no nearest rivals listed in the database, reflecting its lack of measured performance data.