Intel Core 7 251TE vs Intel Core Ultra X9 378H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons. The only exception is a single test where the Intel Core 7 251TE takes the lead: PassMark integer math, where it scores 125739 against 92603, a 35.8% advantage. That result indicates the older desktop chip retains a clear edge in pure integer arithmetic workloads.

The consistency of the Ultra X9 378H's victories is notable. Across the entire Cinebench suite, the mobile processor wins every test by exactly 21.6%. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the Ultra X9 378H scores 32553 versus 25518 for the Core 7 251TE. The single-core R23 result follows the same pattern: 4595 versus 3602. These identical delta percentages suggest the performance gap is structural rather than workload-specific, likely tied to architectural efficiency rather than any single benchmark quirk.

The largest single deltas appear in specialized PassMark workloads. The Ultra X9 378H leads by 60.8% in find prime numbers, scoring 357 versus 140. Extended instructions show a 45.8% gap, with the Ultra X9 378H at 31315 and the Core 7 251TE at 16974. Physics testing reveals a 43.1% difference, 3404 versus 1938. These wide margins indicate that the newer architecture handles complex instruction sequences and floating-point-heavy tasks far more effectively.

Data encryption also favors the Ultra X9 378H substantially, 29840 versus 22176, a 25.7% difference. Floating-point math follows with a 25.2% gap, 114500 versus 85607. The more moderate deltas appear in data compression at 13.5% (386591 versus 334399), random string sorting at 11.2% (44648 versus 39643), and single-thread performance at 19.9% (4453 versus 3568). Even the smallest of these margins still represents a meaningful performance advantage for the Ultra X9 378H.

The average benchmark score reinforces this picture. The Ultra X9 378H records an average of 47468 across all tests, placing it in the 89th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 7 251TE averages 41650, sitting in the 88th percentile. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 251TE include the Intel Core Ultra 7 265H with an average score of 41621 and a delta of 0.1%, plus the Intel Core i7-14650HX at 41576 with a 0.2% delta. For the Ultra X9 378H, the closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 5945 at 47527, a -0.1% delta, followed by the Intel Core i7-13700KF at 47330 with a 0.3% delta.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design families. The Core 7 251TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 7 generation, built on Intel's 10 nm process node. It is a desktop-class chip with a 215 mm² die size and fits the Intel Socket 1700. The Ultra X9 378H carries the Panther Lake codename, belongs to the Ultra X9 (Panther Lake-H) generation, and uses a 3 nm process node. It targets mobile systems with an Intel BGA 2540 socket.

Core and thread counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 251TE packs 24 cores and 32 threads, while the Ultra X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads. This means the desktop chip has 8 more cores and 16 more threads, yet it still loses every multi-threaded benchmark in the head-to-head data. The efficiency of the Ultra X9 378H's newer design overcomes the raw core-count deficit.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 251TE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Ultra X9 378H offers 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 18 MB of shared L3. The per-core cache figures are substantially higher on the mobile part, which likely contributes to its stronger single-thread results.

Memory support shows a clear generational split. The Core 7 251TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory. The Ultra X9 378H uses LPDDR5X exclusively, also dual-channel, but with a much higher memory bandwidth of 153.6 GB/s. ECC memory is not supported on the mobile chip.

PCIe connectivity differs significantly. The Core 7 251TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Ultra X9 378H offers Gen 5 with only 4 lanes. Integrated graphics also vary: the desktop part uses UHD Graphics 770, while the mobile part features Arc B390. Clock speeds favor the Ultra X9 378H on the base side, 2.00 GHz versus 1.40 GHz, but the Core 7 251TE has a higher boost clock at 5.40 GHz versus 5.00 GHz. The power envelope is much lower on the mobile chip: 25 W TDP versus 45 W.

The Verdict

The recorded data points to the Intel Core Ultra X9 378H as the stronger performer in almost every measured category. Its 21.6% lead across all Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, indicates a broad architectural advantage that persists regardless of thread count. The 45.8% gap in extended instructions and 60.8% gap in prime number finding suggest the newer 3 nm process and Panther Lake design deliver substantially better instruction-level throughput.

The Core 7 251TE retains one clear niche: integer math. Its 35.8% victory in that specific PassMark test shows that certain legacy workloads still benefit from its higher core count and larger L3 cache. For applications that rely heavily on integer operations, the desktop chip remains competitive.

The average benchmark scores tell a straightforward story. The Ultra X9 378H averages 47468, which is roughly 14% higher than the Core 7 251TE's 41650. The 89th versus 88th percentile placement is close, but the absolute scores show a consistent edge for the mobile processor. The Ultra X9 378H also achieves this with a 25 W TDP versus 45 W, meaning the performance advantage comes at half the power draw.

For users prioritizing raw multi-threaded throughput, the data favors the Ultra X9 378H despite having 8 fewer cores and 16 fewer threads. For users with workloads specifically tied to integer math, the Core 7 251TE has the measurable advantage. The desktop chip also offers ECC memory support and 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, which are not available on the mobile part.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 251TE | Intel Core Ultra X9 378H |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 24 | 16 |

| Threads | 32 | 16 |

| Base clock | 1.40 GHz | 2.00 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.40 GHz | 5.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 25 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 2540 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Panther Lake |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Die size | 215 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 36 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 153.6 GB/s |

| ECC memory | Supported | Not supported |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 lanes | Gen 5, 4 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 770 | Arc B390 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-04-03 |

| Launch MSRP | $384 | Not recorded |

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 X9 378H has 16 cores and 16 threads.

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

A: The Ultra X9 378H scores 32553, while the Core 7 251TE scores 25518. The Ultra X9 378H leads by 21.6%.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the Core 7 251TE wins?

A: Yes, PassMark integer math. The Core 7 251TE scores 125739 versus 92603 for the Ultra X9 378H, a 35.8% advantage.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Ultra X9 378H has 153.6 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The Core 7 251TE has 89.6 GB/s.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: Only the Intel Core 7 251TE supports ECC memory. The Ultra X9 378H does not.

Q: What are the integrated graphics solutions?

A: The Core 7 251TE uses UHD Graphics 770. The Ultra X9 378H uses Arc B390.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra X9 378H wins across the overwhelming majority of recorded workloads. Its 21.6% lead in every Cinebench test covers both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering scenarios. The 25.7% advantage in data encryption and 25.2% lead in floating-point math make it the stronger choice for cryptography and scientific computing tasks. The 45.8% gap in extended instructions and 60.8% gap in prime number finding point to superior handling of complex, specialized instruction sets. The 43.1% lead in physics simulation further cements its position for computational modeling.

The Intel Core 7 251TE wins only in PassMark integer math, where its 35.8% advantage suggests a specific strength in integer-heavy processing. Its larger L3 cache of 36 MB versus 18 MB and higher core count of 24 versus 16 provide the resources for this particular workload. For desktop users who require ECC memory, 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, or the ability to use DDR4 or DDR5 memory modules, the Core 7 251TE offers hardware features the mobile chip cannot match.

For mobile systems, the Ultra X9 378H delivers a higher average benchmark score of 47468 with a 25 W TDP. The Core 7 251TE averages 41650 at 45 W. The data shows the Ultra X9 378H achieves superior performance in nearly all tests while drawing less power, making it the clear choice for portable or thermally constrained environments. The Core 7 251TE remains relevant only for integer-specific workloads or for systems requiring desktop socket compatibility, ECC support, or extensive PCIe lane availability.