AMD Ryzen 3 3100U vs Intel Core 5 220H Comparison

FAQ

Q: What is the core and thread count difference between the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and the Intel Core 5 220H?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has 2 cores and 2 threads, while the Intel Core 5 220H has 12 cores and 16 threads. This is a substantial difference in parallel processing capability.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock speed?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H has a boost clock of 4.90 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Intel part also has a higher base clock at 2.70 GHz versus 1.90 GHz.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H has an average benchmark score of 28574, placing it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has an average score of 6247, placing it in the 62nd percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor according to the database?

A: For the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U, the nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X (0.3% higher score), AMD EPYC 7272 (1% higher), and Intel Core i9-7940X (1.6% higher). For the Intel Core 5 220H, the nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 7203P (0% difference), AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS (0.1% higher), and Intel Xeon E-2436 (0.2% higher).

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

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core 5 220H has a TDP of 45 watts. This indicates a very different power envelope and thermal design target.

Q: Which processor supports PCIe Gen 5?

A: The Intel Core 5 220H supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U is limited to PCIe Gen 3.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and Intel Core 5 220H represent fundamentally different design approaches. The Ryzen 3 3100U is built on the Picasso architecture, which is part of the Zen+ family, and manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The silicon contains 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. In contrast, the Intel Core 5 220H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The database does not record transistor count or die size for the Intel part.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The Ryzen 3 3100U offers 2 cores and 2 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core 5 220H provides 12 cores and 16 threads, which implies a hybrid configuration typical of Raptor Lake designs with performance and efficiency cores. This structural difference explains most of the performance gap observed in benchmarks.

Cache hierarchies also differ notably. The AMD part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor's L3 cache is more than four times larger, which helps with larger working sets and multi-threaded workloads.

Memory support differs as well. The Ryzen 3 3100U supports DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel Core 5 220H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also in dual-channel configuration, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

The integrated graphics solutions are distinct. AMD uses Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 80 execution units. The sockets are incompatible: AMD Socket FP5 versus Intel BGA 1744. Both processors are marked as Active in production status and are unlocked multipliers are not available for either.

The release dates differ significantly. The Intel Core 5 220H was released in December 2024, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has a release date of May 2026 in the database. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $342.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a clean sweep: the Intel Core 5 220H wins all 11 recorded benchmark comparisons. The margins are substantial in most cases, though the single-threaded gap is narrower.

The largest relative deficit for the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U appears in floating-point math, where Intel scores 51671 against AMD's 5854, a delta of -88.7%. Integer math shows a similar pattern: Intel at 73555 versus AMD at 8873, a -87.9% difference. These results suggest the Intel part's wider execution resources and higher clock speeds dominate arithmetic workloads.

Data compression and encryption also favor Intel heavily. In data compression, Intel scores 247921 versus AMD's 38455, a -84.5% delta. In data encryption, Intel scores 15216 versus AMD's 1972, a -87% delta. The encryption result is particularly lopsided, likely reflecting the benefit of Intel's newer instruction set extensions and higher core count.

The multithreaded benchmark shows Intel at 21884 versus AMD's 3348, a -84.7% delta. This aligns with the core count disparity: 12 cores versus 2 cores. Physics simulation shows Intel at 1478 versus AMD's 232, a -84.3% delta. Random string sorting shows Intel at 28438 versus AMD's 4666, a -83.6% delta. Extended instructions show Intel at 14642 versus AMD's 2116, a -85.5% delta. Prime number finding shows Intel at 82 versus AMD's 18, a -78% delta.

The closest competition appears in single-threaded performance. Intel scores 3405 versus AMD's 1592, a -53.2% delta. While still a decisive Intel win, this is the smallest percentage gap in the entire suite. The single-threaded results indicate that even with fewer cores, the Ryzen 3 3100U's per-core performance is comparatively closer to Intel's, though it remains lower in absolute terms.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 3 3100U | Intel Core 5 220H |

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

| Cores | 2 | 12 |

| Threads | 2 | 16 |

| Base Clock | 1.90 GHz | 2.70 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.20 GHz | 4.90 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FP5 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Architecture | Zen+ (Picasso) | Raptor Lake |

| Process Node | 12 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | GlobalFoundries | Intel |

| L1 Cache | 96 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 512 KB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 4 MB (shared) | 18 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 38.4 GB/s | Not recorded |

| PCIe | Gen 3 | Gen 5, 8 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon Vega 8 | Iris Xe Graphics 80EU |

| Transistors | 4,940 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 210 mm² | Not recorded |

| Release Date | 2026-05-31 | 2024-12-17 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $342 |

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents an unambiguous picture. The Intel Core 5 220H outperforms the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U in every recorded test, with deltas ranging from -53.2% to -88.7%. The Intel processor's average benchmark score of 28574 places it in the 80th percentile of all CPUs, while the AMD part's 6247 places it in the 62nd percentile. The database shows Intel's nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 7203P (0% delta) and AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 6850HS (0.1% higher), indicating it is competitive with much newer server and high-end mobile parts.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X (0.3% higher) and Intel Core i9-7940X (1.6% higher), showing it performs in the range of older high-core-count desktop processors despite having only 2 cores. This suggests the Ryzen 3 3100U's per-core efficiency is respectable, but its overall throughput is severely constrained by the lack of cores and threads.

The power envelope is a key differentiator. The AMD part draws only 15 watts TDP, while the Intel part draws 45 watts. This makes the Ryzen 3 3100U suitable for low-power, fanless, or passively cooled designs, whereas the Core 5 220H requires more substantial thermal solutions. The choice between them depends heavily on the intended use case.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 220H wins in every benchmark category recorded, so its advantages span the entire performance spectrum. The largest margins come from floating-point math (-88.7%), integer math (-87.9%), and encryption (-87%), indicating that compute-heavy workloads such as scientific calculations, financial modeling, and data encryption will see massive improvements with the Intel part. The 18 MB L3 cache and 12 cores provide significant headroom for parallel workloads, and the data compression result (247921 versus 38455) confirms strong performance in archiving and data manipulation tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U's wins are not performance-based in the recorded benchmarks. Instead, its advantages lie in the specification sheet. The 15-watt TDP is one-third of the Intel part's 45-watt TDP, making it more suitable for battery-constrained mobile devices or compact systems with limited cooling. The smaller die size of 210 mm² and the 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries represent a more mature manufacturing approach. The AMD part also uses the FP5 socket, which may be more readily available in certain low-power laptop designs.

For single-threaded tasks, the Intel Core 5 220H still leads with a 3405 score versus 1592, but the -53.2% delta is the smallest gap in the suite. This means that in lightly threaded applications, the Intel advantage shrinks, though it does not disappear. The Ryzen 3 3100U's 2 cores and 2 threads will struggle with any modern multitasking scenario, while the Intel part's 16 threads provide ample parallelism.

The memory support difference is notable. The Intel Core 5 220H supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U is limited to DDR4. This gives Intel-based systems a path to newer memory technology, although the database does not record a bandwidth figure for the Intel part to compare against the AMD part's 38.4 GB/s. The PCIe Gen 5 support on the Intel part, with 8 CPU lanes, enables faster connectivity to compatible storage and peripherals, whereas the AMD part is limited to PCIe Gen 3.

In summary, the data indicates that the Intel Core 5 220H is the superior performer across all recorded benchmarks, with the Ryzen 3 3100U offering a lower-power alternative for constrained designs. The choice between them should be driven by power budget and thermal limits rather than raw performance expectations.