Intel Core 7 253PE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE records an average benchmark score of 40557, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H records 33537. The Core 7 253PE sits at the 87th percentile of all CPUs, and the Core Ultra 7 255H sits at the 83rd percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded Cinebench workloads?

A: The Core 7 253PE leads substantially in Cinebench multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 24880 versus 9240 for the Core Ultra 7 255H, a 169.3% advantage. The R20 multi-core result shows 10449 versus 6381, a 63.8% lead for the Core 7 253PE.

Q: Are there any workloads where the Core Ultra 7 255H wins?

A: Yes. The Core Ultra 7 255H wins 9 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. It leads in PassMark data encryption (23395 versus 18385, a 21.4% advantage), floating point math (98796 versus 80870, an 18.1% advantage), and single-thread performance (4317 versus 3955, an 8.4% advantage).

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PE has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Core 7 253PE delivers higher multi-core scores in Cinebench tests.

Q: What process nodes do the two processors use?

A: The Core 7 253PE uses a 10 nm process node fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 255H uses a 3 nm process node fabricated by TSMC.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Core 7 253PE has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.50 GHz. The Core Ultra 7 255H has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.10 GHz.

Q: How does the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Core 7 253PE includes UHD Graphics 730, while the Core Ultra 7 255H includes Arc Graphics 140T. No benchmark scores for the integrated graphics are recorded in the database.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 253PE and Intel Core Ultra 7 255H represent two distinct designs from Intel. The Core 7 253PE is built on the Bartlett Lake codename, part of the Core 7 generation, while the Core Ultra 7 255H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 with the Arrow Lake architecture and Arrow Lake-H codename.

The process nodes differ significantly. The Core 7 253PE uses a 10 nm node fabricated by Intel, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses a 3 nm node fabricated by TSMC. This process difference contributes to the power characteristics of each chip, with the Core 7 253PE rated at 65 W TDP and the Core Ultra 7 255H rated at 28 W TDP.

Core and thread configurations also diverge. The Core 7 253PE provides 10 cores and 20 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 255H provides 16 cores and 16 threads without multithreading. The higher core count on the Core Ultra 7 255H does not translate into multi-core performance leadership, as the benchmark data shows the Core 7 253PE winning all Cinebench multi-core tests.

Cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Core 7 253PE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 33 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 7 253PE therefore offers more L3 cache total, while the Core Ultra 7 255H offers more L1 and L2 per core.

Memory support differs as well. The Core 7 253PE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel configuration and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel configuration and 102.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both processors support ECC memory. PCIe lanes also differ: the Core 7 253PE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the Core Ultra 7 255H provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes.

The sockets are incompatible. The Core 7 253PE uses Intel Socket 1700, targeting desktop systems, while the Core Ultra 7 255H uses Intel BGA 2049, targeting mobile platforms. The market segments confirm this split: the Core 7 253PE is a desktop processor, and the Core Ultra 7 255H is a mobile processor.

The Core 7 253PE has a release date of 2026-03-08 and a launch MSRP of $384. The Core Ultra 7 255H has a release date of 2025-01-12 with no launch MSRP recorded. Both processors are active in production and do not have unlocked multipliers.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear split by workload type. The Intel Core 7 253PE dominates in CPU-heavy rendering and compression tasks. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 24880 versus 9240 represents a 169.3% advantage, the largest margin in the head-to-head results. Integer math also favors the Core 7 253PE by 46.4%, and data compression favors it by 13.5%.

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins in several specialized workloads. It leads in data encryption by 21.4%, extended instructions by 8.2%, find prime numbers by 54.5%, floating point math by 18.1%, physics by 18.1%, random string sorting by 9.1%, and single-thread PassMark by 8.4%. The PassMark multithread score also favors the Core Ultra 7 255H, though by only 4.7%.

For desktop users running Cinebench-class rendering workloads, the Core 7 253PE is the stronger choice based on recorded measurements. For mobile users or workloads emphasizing encryption, floating point math, and physics calculations, the Core Ultra 7 255H shows advantages. The Core Ultra 7 255H also consumes less power at 28 W TDP versus 65 W, which aligns with its mobile positioning.

The percentile rankings place the Core 7 253PE at 87 and the Core Ultra 7 255H at 83, both above average. The average benchmark score of 40557 for the Core 7 253PE exceeds the 33537 of the Core Ultra 7 255H. The nearest rivals for the Core 7 253PE include the Intel Core 5 223PE at 40585 (-0.1% delta), the Intel Core Ultra X7 368H at 40518 (+0.1%), the Intel Xeon 6357P at 40630 (-0.2%), and the AMD Ryzen 9 7940H at 40431 (+0.3%). The nearest rivals for the Core Ultra 7 255H include the AMD Ryzen 5 240 at 33542 (0% delta), the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS at 33667 (-0.4%), the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX at 33668 (-0.4%), and the Intel Core i5-12600HX at 33375 (+0.5%).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field. The Core 7 253PE has 10 cores and 20 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads. Base clocks are 2.50 GHz versus 2.00 GHz, and boost clocks are 5.50 GHz versus 5.10 GHz, both favoring the Core 7 253PE.

TDP ratings differ by more than double: 65 W for the Core 7 253PE versus 28 W for the Core Ultra 7 255H. The sockets are Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2049. The codenames are Bartlett Lake versus Arrow Lake-H. Process nodes are 10 nm versus 3 nm, and foundries are Intel versus TSMC.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. L1 cache is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core. L2 cache is 2 MB per core versus 3 MB per core. L3 shared cache is 33 MB versus 24 MB.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Memory bandwidth is 89.6 GB/s versus 102.4 GB/s. PCIe configurations are Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 5 with 20 lanes. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 730 versus Arc Graphics 140T. Market segments are Desktop versus Mobile. Release dates are 2026-03-08 versus 2025-01-12. Part numbers are SA4QE versus SRQAN.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show 8 wins for the Core 7 253PE and 9 wins for the Core Ultra 7 255H across 17 comparisons. The margins vary widely by test.

The Core 7 253PE wins all Cinebench tests by substantial margins. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 2507 versus 1515, a 65.5% advantage. R15 single-core shows 354 versus 251, a 41% lead. R20 multi-core shows 10449 versus 6381, a 63.8% lead. R20 single-core shows 1475 versus 900, a 63.9% lead. R23 multi-core shows 24880 versus 9240, a 169.3% lead, the largest margin recorded. R23 single-core shows 3512 versus 1843, a 90.6% lead.

PassMark integer math also favors the Core 7 253PE, with 114158 versus 77975, a 46.4% advantage. PassMark data compression favors the Core 7 253PE with 339133 versus 298850, a 13.5% lead.

The Core Ultra 7 255H wins the remaining PassMark tests. Data encryption shows 23395 versus 18385, a 21.4% advantage. Extended instructions show 23755 versus 21806, an 8.2% lead. Find prime numbers shows 303 versus 138, a 54.5% advantage. Floating point math shows 98796 versus 80870, an 18.1% lead. Physics shows 2254 versus 1845, an 18.1% lead. Random string sorting shows 36058 versus 32777, a 9.1% lead. Single-thread PassMark shows 4317 versus 3955, an 8.4% lead. PassMark multithread shows 30703 versus 29271, a 4.7% lead.

The Core Ultra 7 255H also has Geekbench scores recorded in its individual benchmark list: 14024 multi-core and 2335 single-core. The Core 7 253PE does not have Geekbench scores recorded.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 253PE wins in rendering and integer-heavy workloads. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the largest margin at 169.3%, indicating strong sustained multi-threaded performance for CPU rendering tasks. The 63.8% to 65.5% leads in Cinebench R20 and R15 multi-core reinforce this pattern. Single-core Cinebench leads range from 41% to 90.6%, showing that the Core 7 253PE also excels in lightly threaded rendering tasks. Integer math at 46.4% ahead and data compression at 13.5% ahead round out its strengths.

The Core Ultra 7 255H wins in encryption, floating point, and specialized workloads. Data encryption leads by 21.4%, indicating stronger cryptographic throughput. Floating point math leads by 18.1%, relevant for scientific and simulation workloads. Find prime numbers leads by 54.5%, the largest margin for the Core Ultra 7 255H, which suggests efficiency in prime-number computation tasks. Physics leads by 18.1%, and random string sorting leads by 9.1%. Extended instructions lead by 8.2%. Single-thread PassMark leads by 8.4%, and multithread PassMark leads by 4.7%.

The win distribution is nearly even, with 8 wins for the Core 7 253PE and 9 for the Core Ultra 7 255H. However, the magnitudes differ sharply. The Core 7 253PE wins by large margins in Cinebench and integer math, while the Core Ultra 7 255H wins by smaller margins in most PassMark tests, with the exception of find prime numbers at 54.5%.

For desktop rendering, compilation, or data compression use cases, the Core 7 253PE delivers substantially higher performance. For mobile systems, encryption-heavy workloads, or floating-point calculations, the Core Ultra 7 255H provides the better balance of wins and lower power consumption at 28 W TDP. The 65 W TDP of the Core 7 253PE indicates higher power draw, consistent with its desktop market segment.