Intel Core 7 253PQE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 258V Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 253PQE records an average benchmark score of 55919, while the Intel Core Ultra 7 258V records 20454. The Core 7 253PQE sits at the 91st percentile among all CPUs, whereas the Core Ultra 7 258V sits at the 74th percentile.

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

A: The Core 7 253PQE scores 31390 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 10301. That is a 204.7% advantage for the Core 7 253PQE, the largest delta across all recorded head-to-head tests.

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

A: The Core 7 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads. The Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Core 7 253PQE also runs at a base clock of 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 5.70 GHz, while the Core Ultra 7 258V runs at 2.20 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Core 7 253PQE supports ECC memory. The Core Ultra 7 258V does not.

Q: In the head-to-head benchmark table, how many tests does each processor win?

A: The Core 7 253PQE wins 17 tests. The Core Ultra 7 258V wins 0 tests. The smallest margin is in PassMark single-thread tests, where the Core 7 253PQE leads by 9.2%.

Q: What are the process nodes for these two CPUs?

A: The Core 7 253PQE is built on Intel's 10 nm process, fabricated by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 258V is built on TSMC's 3 nm process, fabricated by TSMC.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent fundamentally different design philosophies within Intel's lineup. The Core 7 253PQE is a desktop part based on the Bartlett Lake codename, while the Core Ultra 7 258V is a mobile part from the Lunar Lake architecture and Core Ultra Series 2. The Core 7 253PQE uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market segment. The Core Ultra 7 258V uses Intel BGA 2833 and targets the mobile segment.

The manufacturing process differs substantially. The Core 7 253PQE is fabricated on Intel's 10 nm node, whereas the Core Ultra 7 258V is fabricated on TSMC's 3 nm node. That process difference helps explain the power envelope disparity: the Core 7 253PQE has a TDP of 125 watts, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has a TDP of just 17 watts. The mobile chip is designed for efficiency, the desktop chip for sustained throughput.

Core counts diverge sharply. The Core 7 253PQE provides 10 cores and 20 threads, enabling simultaneous multithreading. The Core Ultra 7 258V provides 8 cores and 8 threads, with no multithreading. Clock speeds reinforce the desktop part's aggressive posture: the Core 7 253PQE boosts to 5.70 GHz, the Core Ultra 7 258V boosts to 4.80 GHz.

Cache hierarchies also differ. The Core 7 253PQE 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 258V has 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and only 12 MB of shared L3 cache. Despite the smaller L3 pool, the Lunar Lake chip has more L1 and L2 per core, reflecting different memory access patterns for mobile workloads.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The Core 7 253PQE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration, with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Core Ultra 7 258V supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with higher bandwidth at 136.5 GB/s. The mobile chip also lacks ECC support, which the desktop part includes.

PCIe lanes show another split. The Core 7 253PQE provides Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes. The Core Ultra 7 258V provides Gen 5 with only 4 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 7 253PQE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Core Ultra 7 258V uses Arc 140V. Neither chip has an unlocked multiplier.

The release dates reflect the product sequence. The Core Ultra 7 258V launched on 2024-09-23. The Core 7 253PQE launched on 2026-03-08. Both are listed as Active in production status.

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a one-sided comparison. The Core 7 253PQE wins all 17 head-to-head tests recorded in the database. Its average benchmark score of 55919 places it near the top tier, at the 91st percentile. The Core Ultra 7 258V, with an average score of 20454, sits at the 74th percentile.

For workloads that demand raw compute, the Core 7 253PQE is the clear choice. The desktop part delivers massive multi-core advantages: Cinebench R23 multi-core shows a 204.7% lead, and PassMark integer math shows a 221.3% lead. Those deltas indicate the 10-core, 20-thread configuration with a 5.70 GHz boost clock is in a different performance class.

The Core Ultra 7 258V, however, serves a distinct purpose. Its 17-watt TDP and 3 nm TSMC process make it suitable for thin-and-light mobile systems where battery life and thermal constraints dominate. Its 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth and 8-core Lunar Lake layout prioritize efficiency over absolute performance. The data shows it is competitive in single-threaded PassMark tests, trailing by only 9.2%, which suggests it holds its own in lightly threaded tasks given its power budget.

Users requiring sustained multi-threaded rendering, compilation, or scientific workloads should select the Core 7 253PQE. Users prioritizing portability and low power consumption, with modest performance demands, should consider the Core Ultra 7 258V. The benchmark record does not support any other conclusion.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every core specification. The Core 7 253PQE has 10 cores and 20 threads; the Core Ultra 7 258V has 8 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.50 GHz versus 2.20 GHz. Boost clocks are 5.70 GHz versus 4.80 GHz.

Thermal design power shows the largest gap: 125 watts for the Core 7 253PQE versus 17 watts for the Core Ultra 7 258V. Socket types differ completely: Intel Socket 1700 for the desktop chip, Intel BGA 2833 for the mobile chip.

Cache configurations diverge at each level. L1 per core: 80 KB versus 192 KB. L2 per core: 2 MB versus 2.5 MB. L3 shared: 33 MB versus 12 MB. The Core 7 253PQE has far more total cache, while the Core Ultra 7 258V has larger per-core allocations.

Memory support splits by type. The Core 7 253PQE accepts DDR4 and DDR5. The Core Ultra 7 258V accepts LPDDR5X only. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but bandwidth favors the mobile part: 136.5 GB/s versus 89.6 GB/s. ECC memory is supported on the Core 7 253PQE and absent on the Core Ultra 7 258V.

PCIe connectivity favors the desktop part: Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 5 with 4 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc 140V. Process node: 10 nm Intel versus 3 nm TSMC. Foundry: Intel versus TSMC. Market segment: Desktop versus Mobile. Release date: 2026-03-08 versus 2024-09-23. The Core 7 253PQE has a launch MSRP of $409; no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core Ultra 7 258V.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest margin comes from PassMark integer math, where the Core 7 253PQE scores 137795 against 42889 for the Core Ultra 7 258V, a 221.3% advantage. That result reflects the desktop chip's 20 threads and high boost clock. Cinebench R23 multi-core follows closely: 31390 versus 10301, a 204.7% lead. The Core 7 253PQE's 10 cores with multithreading overwhelm the 8-core, 8-thread mobile chip.

PassMark data compression shows a 175.8% gap: 487335 versus 176686. Extended instructions produce a 120.1% delta: 32390 versus 14717. Multithread performance in PassMark gives the Core 7 253PQE a 120.6% lead, 41656 versus 18887. Random string sorting sees a 151.3% difference, 54222 versus 21580.

Cinebench R15 multi-core and R20 multi-core show similar patterns. R15 multi-core: 3163 versus 1596.5, a 98.1% lead. R20 multi-core: 13183 versus 6739, a 95.6% lead. Both confirm the desktop part's dominance in heavily threaded rendering workloads.

Single-core tests show smaller but still decisive margins. Cinebench R15 single-core: 446 versus 285, a 56.5% lead. R20 single-core: 1861 versus 951, a 95.7% lead. R23 single-core: 4431 versus 1872, a 136.7% lead. The boost clock difference of 5.70 GHz versus 4.80 GHz likely drives much of this gap.

PassMark single-thread results narrow the gap considerably. The Core 7 253PQE scores 4389, the Core Ultra 7 258V scores 4018, a 9.2% difference. This is the closest contest in the entire head-to-head table. The Lunar Lake architecture's per-core efficiency shows through here, even at a much lower TDP.

Other PassMark tests favor the desktop chip by margins between 11.4% and 89.8%. Find prime numbers: 206 versus 185, an 11.4% lead. Floating point math: 105279 versus 57372, an 83.5% lead. Physics: 2970 versus 1565, an 89.8% lead. Data encryption: 25515 versus 13534, an 88.5% lead.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 7 253PQE wins every recorded benchmark, so its strengths are comprehensive. It excels in multi-threaded rendering, as shown by Cinebench R23 multi-core with a 204.7% advantage. It leads in integer math, floating point math, and data compression by margins exceeding 83%. For desktop workloads like video encoding, 3D rendering, software compilation, or scientific simulation, the data shows overwhelming superiority.

The Core 7 253PQE also wins single-threaded tests across Cinebench versions, with advantages ranging from 56.5% to 136.7%. Its 5.70 GHz boost clock gives it a clear edge in lightly threaded applications that depend on raw clock speed. PassMark single-thread shows a smaller but positive 9.2% lead.

The Core Ultra 7 258V has no benchmark wins, but its profile suggests specific use cases. Its 17-watt TDP and 3 nm process indicate a design optimized for battery-constrained mobile devices. The 136.5 GB/s memory bandwidth exceeds the desktop part, which could benefit memory-bandwidth-sensitive workloads within its power envelope. Its larger per-core L1 and L2 caches (192 KB and 2.5 MB versus 80 KB and 2 MB) may help with certain latency-sensitive tasks, though the recorded tests do not isolate this effect.

The closest result, PassMark single-thread at 9.2% behind, shows the Lunar Lake chip is not far off in lightly threaded, efficiency-focused scenarios. The Core Ultra 7 258V also includes Arc 140V integrated graphics, which provides a more capable GPU than the UHD Graphics 770 in the desktop part, though no graphics benchmarks are recorded in this dataset.

For mobile users who need a compact, low-power processor with decent single-thread performance, the Core Ultra 7 258V fits that niche. For anyone prioritizing compute throughput, the Core 7 253PQE is the only choice supported by the benchmark data. The 17-win sweep leaves no ambiguity about which chip delivers higher performance across the tested workloads.