Intel Core i5-14501TE vs Intel Core Ultra 7 255H Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H is the stronger processor in every measurable category. The recorded data shows it scores 33,537 in the average benchmark score, placing it in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core i5-14501TE sits in the 50th percentile with no benchmark scores recorded in the database. The Core Ultra 7 255H delivers a 16-core, 16-thread configuration, while the Core i5-14501TE offers 6 cores and 12 threads. The Ultra 7 255H also operates on a 3 nm process node from TSMC, compared to the 10 nm node used for the i5-14501TE. For any workload, the Core Ultra 7 255H is the clear choice based on the data. The i5-14501TE has no recorded performance metrics, making it impossible to recommend for performance-sensitive tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel generations and use fundamentally different designs. The Core i5-14501TE belongs to the Core 14th Gen series, built on the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-R codename. It uses a 10 nm process node manufactured by Intel. The Core Ultra 7 255H belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2, built on the Arrow Lake architecture with the Arrow Lake-H codename. It uses a 3 nm process node manufactured by TSMC.

The core configurations differ sharply. The i5-14501TE has 6 cores and 12 threads, suggesting a hybrid design with performance and efficiency cores. The Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores and 16 threads, which indicates an architecture without simultaneous multithreading, where each core operates as a single thread. The cache hierarchy also differs. The i5-14501TE has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 cache per core and 3 MB of L2 cache per core. Both share 24 MB of L3 cache.

Memory support separates the two as well. The i5-14501TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Ultra 7 255H supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the Ultra 7 255H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The i5-14501TE does not have a listed memory bandwidth figure. Both support ECC memory.

The integrated graphics differ. The i5-14501TE uses UHD Graphics 770, while the Ultra 7 255H uses Arc Graphics 140T. PCIe support shows a difference in lane count: the i5-14501TE provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Ultra 7 255H provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes from the CPU.

The sockets and market segments reflect their intended platforms. The i5-14501TE uses Intel Socket 1700 and targets the desktop market. The Ultra 7 255H uses Intel BGA 2049 and targets the mobile market. The i5-14501TE has a 45 TDP, while the Ultra 7 255H has a 28 TDP, indicating the mobile part is designed for lower power envelopes. The i5-14501TE has a die size of 215 mm², while the Ultra 7 255H does not have a listed die size. The i5-14501TE was released on June 30, 2024, and the Ultra 7 255H was released on January 12, 2025.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries comparing these two processors directly. However, the Core Ultra 7 255H has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, while the Core i5-14501TE has none. This absence of data for the i5-14501TE means all performance comparisons must rely on the Ultra 7 255H's recorded results.

The Ultra 7 255H shows strong multi-core performance in Cinebench tests. It scores 1,515 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 6,381 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, and 9,240 in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Single-core results are 251 in Cinebench R15, 900 in Cinebench R20, and 1,843 in Cinebench R23. Geekbench scores are 14,024 for multi-core and 2,335 for single-core.

In PassMark tests, the Ultra 7 255H delivers 30,703 in multi-thread performance and 4,317 in single-thread performance. Specialized workloads show the following results: data compression scores 298,850, data encryption scores 23,395, extended instructions score 23,755, find prime numbers scores 303, floating point math scores 98,796, integer math scores 77,975, physics scores 2,254, and random string sorting scores 36,058.

The nearest rivals for the Ultra 7 255H provide context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 has an average score of 33,542 with a delta percentage of 0, meaning the two are effectively tied. The AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS scores 33,667 with a delta of -0.4%, placing the Ultra 7 255H slightly behind. The AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX also scores 33,668 with a delta of -0.4%. The Intel Core i5-12600HX scores 33,375 with a delta of 0.5%, putting the Ultra 7 255H slightly ahead. These comparisons show the Ultra 7 255H sits within a tight performance band around these four rivals.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across multiple specification fields. The core count differs: 6 cores for the i5-14501TE versus 16 cores for the Ultra 7 255H. Thread count differs: 12 threads versus 16 threads. Base clock differs slightly: 2.20 GHz for the i5-14501TE versus 2.00 GHz for the Ultra 7 255H. Boost clock is identical at 5.10 GHz for both.

The TDP differs substantially: 45 for the i5-14501TE versus 28 for the Ultra 7 255H. Socket differs: Intel Socket 1700 versus Intel BGA 2049. The architecture differs: Raptor Lake versus Arrow Lake. The process node differs: 10 nm versus 3 nm. The foundry differs: Intel versus TSMC.

Cache sizes differ in L1 and L2. The i5-14501TE has 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core. The Ultra 7 255H has 192 KB of L1 per core and 3 MB of L2 per core. L3 cache is the same at 24 MB shared.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for the i5-14501TE versus DDR5 and LPDDR5X for the Ultra 7 255H. The memory bandwidth is only listed for the Ultra 7 255H at 102.4 GB/s. PCIe lane count differs: 16 lanes for the i5-14501TE versus 20 lanes for the Ultra 7 255H. Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 770 versus Arc Graphics 140T.

Market segment differs: desktop for the i5-14501TE versus mobile for the Ultra 7 255H. The die size is listed at 215 mm² for the i5-14501TE but not for the Ultra 7 255H. Both processors are active in production and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Release dates differ: June 30, 2024 for the i5-14501TE and January 12, 2025 for the Ultra 7 255H.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has 16 cores, while the Intel Core i5-14501TE has 6 cores. The Ultra 7 255H also has 16 threads compared to 12 threads for the i5-14501TE.

Q: What is the performance percentile of each processor?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H ranks in the 83rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Intel Core i5-14501TE ranks in the 50th percentile.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i5-14501TE and the Intel Core Ultra 7 255H support ECC memory.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth of the Core Ultra 7 255H?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H has a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Intel Core i5-14501TE does not have a listed memory bandwidth figure.

Q: Which processor uses a newer manufacturing process?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H uses a 3 nm process node from TSMC. The Intel Core i5-14501TE uses a 10 nm process node from Intel.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 7 255H compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 7 255H has an average benchmark score of 33,537. The AMD Ryzen 5 240 scores 33,542 with a 0% delta, the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS scores 33,667 with a -0.4% delta, the AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX scores 33,668 with a -0.4% delta, and the Intel Core i5-12600HX scores 33,375 with a 0.5% delta.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 7 255H wins in every category where recorded data exists. Its 16-core configuration provides a substantial advantage in multi-threaded workloads. The recorded benchmark scores confirm this strength: Cinebench R23 multi-core reaches 9,240, PassMark multi-thread reaches 30,703, and Geekbench multi-core reaches 14,024. The 3 nm process node from TSMC allows this performance within a 28 TDP envelope, making it suitable for mobile platforms that require efficiency alongside capability.

Single-thread performance for the Ultra 7 255H is also strong. Cinebench R23 single-core scores 1,843, Geekbench single-core scores 2,335, and PassMark single-thread scores 4,317. The 5.10 GHz boost clock contributes to these results. The 192 KB L1 cache per core and 3 MB L2 cache per core support latency-sensitive operations.

The Intel Core i5-14501TE has no recorded benchmarks in the database. Its 6-core, 12-thread configuration with a 45 TDP and 10 nm process node suggests it targets desktop systems where a lower core count may suffice. The DDR4 and DDR5 memory support offers flexibility for different platform configurations. The 215 mm² die size and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility indicate a traditional desktop design. The integrated UHD Graphics 770 provides display output without a discrete GPU.

For multi-core workloads, the data clearly favors the Ultra 7 255H. The 16 cores versus 6 cores, combined with the recorded benchmark scores, gives it a decisive edge. For single-core workloads, the identical 5.10 GHz boost clock on both processors suggests similar peak frequency potential, but only the Ultra 7 255H has recorded scores to confirm actual performance.

The nearest rival data places the Ultra 7 255H in a competitive position. A 0% delta versus the AMD Ryzen 5 240 indicates performance parity. A -0.4% delta versus the AMD Ryzen 7 8840HS and AMD Ryzen 5 7645HX shows it trails these chips by a marginal amount. A 0.5% delta versus the Intel Core i5-12600HX shows a slight lead. These deltas are all within one percentage point, meaning the Ultra 7 255H performs essentially at the same level as these four rivals.

The mobile segment benefits from the Ultra 7 255H's lower 28 TDP. The desktop segment sees the i5-14501TE with a higher 45 TDP and no performance data. The choice between these two processors depends entirely on the platform requirements. Mobile systems that need a compact, efficient processor with high core counts should use the Ultra 7 255H. Desktop systems that require Socket 1700 compatibility and DDR4 support may consider the i5-14501TE, but the lack of benchmark data means its performance cannot be verified from the database.