AMD Ryzen 3 3100U vs Intel Core 7 160UL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data records a complete sweep for the Intel Core 7 160UL. Across all 11 head-to-head tests, the Intel part finishes ahead of the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U. The narrowest margin is in single-thread performance, where the Intel chip scores 3391 against 1592 for the AMD part, a 53.1% advantage. This is still a commanding lead, but it is the closest contest in the entire comparison.

The largest gap appears in integer math. The Intel Core 7 160UL delivers 47515 in that workload, while the Ryzen 3 3100U manages only 8873. The delta is 81.3% in favor of Intel. That result indicates a massive disparity in raw arithmetic throughput, likely reflecting the difference in core count and execution resources.

Floating-point math shows a similar pattern. Intel scores 25670, AMD scores 5854, a 77.2% difference. The Intel chip also leads in data compression with 108953 versus 38455, a 64.7% margin. Data encryption shows Intel at 7146 against AMD at 1972, a 72.4% gap. Extended instruction workloads place Intel at 5832 and AMD at 2116, a 63.7% difference.

The multi-thread test puts Intel at 11043 and AMD at 3348, a 69.7% lead for Intel. Physics simulation scores 819 for Intel and 232 for AMD, a 71.7% gap. Random string sorting shows Intel at 11843 versus AMD at 4666, a 60.6% margin. Prime number finding records Intel at 50 and AMD at 18, a 64% difference.

The average benchmark score confirms the overall positioning. Intel's average sits at 14232, while AMD's is 6247. The percentile rankings place Intel at the 69th percentile of all CPUs and AMD at the 62nd percentile. While the percentile gap is modest, the raw score difference is substantial. The data shows zero wins for the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U and 11 wins for the Intel Core 7 160UL.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design generations and physical layouts. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U is built on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, using the Picasso codename and Zen+ architecture. It packs 2 cores and 2 threads, with a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. The Intel Core 7 160UL uses a 10 nm process at Intel, based on Raptor Lake-PS architecture. It provides 10 cores and 12 threads, with a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz.

The transistor counts differ significantly. AMD lists 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. Intel does not report transistor count or die size in the database. The cache hierarchies are also distinct. AMD uses 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Intel uses 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. That gives Intel three times the shared L3 capacity.

Memory support diverges as well. The AMD part supports DDR4 only, with dual-channel memory and a recorded bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel chip supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but no bandwidth figure is recorded. Neither processor supports ECC memory. PCIe generation differs: AMD offers Gen 3, while Intel provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes limited to the CPU.

Integrated graphics are present on both. AMD uses Radeon Vega 8, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics 96EU. The sockets are incompatible: AMD uses Socket FP5, Intel uses Socket 1700. The Intel part is classified as a desktop segment component, while the AMD part is listed as mobile. Both are marked as active in production. The AMD release date is recorded as May 2026, while the Intel release date is April 2024. Neither has a launch MSRP in the database.

Clock behavior reveals another layer of difference. The Intel chip has a much higher boost ceiling at 5.20 GHz compared to 3.20 GHz for AMD, despite a slightly lower base clock. The core count gap is the most structurally significant factor: 10 cores and 12 threads for Intel versus 2 cores and 2 threads for AMD. This explains why the Intel processor dominates multi-threaded and math-heavy workloads so thoroughly.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points to a clear performance hierarchy. The Intel Core 7 160UL is the faster processor in every recorded workload. The single-thread score of 3391 versus 1592 indicates that even at the per-core level, Intel holds a decisive edge. The multi-thread score of 11043 versus 3348 shows the advantage compounds significantly when all cores are engaged.

For users who prioritize raw compute throughput, the Intel Core 7 160UL is the only reasonable choice from this data. The 81.3% lead in integer math and 77.2% lead in floating-point math are decisive. The processor also leads in memory-sensitive tasks like data compression and encryption, with margins of 64.7% and 72.4% respectively. The 69th percentile ranking places it above the majority of all CPUs in the database.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U does not win any workload in this comparison. Its 62nd percentile ranking is respectable, but the recorded scores fall far behind. The 2-core, 2-thread configuration limits its ceiling. The 12 nm process and Zen+ architecture are older designs relative to the 10 nm Raptor Lake-PS. The shared L3 cache of 4 MB is a third of Intel's 12 MB.

The data does not suggest a scenario where the AMD part is preferable on performance grounds. The Intel chip delivers more in single-thread, multi-thread, memory-intensive, and math-heavy workloads. The only areas where the AMD part could be considered are those outside the recorded benchmark set, such as power characteristics or integrated graphics capability, but the database provides no numbers to compare those aspects.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher single-thread score?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL scores 3391 in the passmark single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U scores 1592. Intel leads by 53.1%.

Q: How many cores and threads does each processor have?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has 2 cores and 2 threads. The Intel Core 7 160UL has 10 cores and 12 threads.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two processors?

A: The largest delta is in passmark integer math, where Intel scores 47515 and AMD scores 8873, an 81.3% difference in favor of Intel.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U supports DDR4 only. The Intel Core 7 160UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: What are the boost clocks for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U boosts to 3.20 GHz. The Intel Core 7 160UL boosts to 5.20 GHz.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 160UL records an average benchmark score of 14232, compared to 6247 for the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 160UL wins in every benchmark category recorded. Multi-thread performance is a major strength, with a 69.7% lead. The 10-core, 12-thread configuration directly supports workloads that scale across cores. Integer math shows the largest advantage at 81.3%, suggesting strong execution throughput. Floating-point math follows closely at 77.2%. Data encryption shows a 72.4% lead, and physics simulation shows a 71.7% lead.

Data compression favors Intel by 64.7%, and random string sorting favors Intel by 60.6%. Extended instruction workloads give Intel a 63.7% margin. Prime number finding shows Intel at 64% ahead. Single-thread performance, while the smallest margin at 53.1%, still gives Intel a substantial edge.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U does not have a winning workload in this dataset. Its strengths are not visible in the recorded benchmarks. The 2-core, 2-thread layout and 3.20 GHz boost clock place it at a structural disadvantage. The 4 MB shared L3 cache is smaller than Intel's 12 MB. The 12 nm process node is older than Intel's 10 nm node. The database records zero wins for the AMD part across all head-to-head tests.

The use-case split is therefore one-sided. For any task represented by the passmark suite, the Intel Core 7 160UL is the superior option. The data offers no evidence of a workload where the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U closes the gap. The Intel processor also holds the higher percentile ranking at 69 versus 62, reinforcing its position relative to the broader CPU landscape. The AMD part remains a functional processor, but the recorded measurements show it trailing across the board.