AMD Ryzen 3 7335U vs Intel Core 3 100U Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U holds the higher average score at 16827, while the Intel Core 3 100U records 16148. Both sit at the 70th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How do the two chips compare in multi-threaded performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U wins the majority of multi-threaded tests, including Cinebench R23 multicore (10703 vs 10624) and PassMark multithread (12592 vs 12522). However, the Intel chip takes a decisive 35.4% lead in the PassMark physics test.

Q: Which processor offers better single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core 3 100U leads in PassMark single-thread scoring with 3506 versus 3053, a 14.8% advantage. In Cinebench tests, the AMD chip edges out the Intel part by roughly 1% in all three R15, R20, and R23 single-core runs.

Q: What are the core and thread configurations?

A: The Intel Core 3 100U has 6 cores and 8 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite fewer physical cores, the AMD part maintains competitive or superior scores across most workloads.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U supports ECC memory, while the Intel Core 3 100U does not. This is a notable feature difference for users requiring error-correcting memory.

Q: How do the integrated graphics compare?

A: The Intel Core 3 100U features UHD Graphics 64EU, while the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U includes the Radeon 660M. The database does not record direct graphics benchmark comparisons between these two iGPUs.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 100U is built on Raptor Lake architecture using a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. It uses the Intel BGA 1744 socket. The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U employs Zen 3+ architecture on a 6 nm process fabricated by TSMC, using the AMD Socket FP7. The process node difference is substantial: the AMD chip uses a significantly smaller 6 nm process compared to Intel's 10 nm node.

The cache hierarchies differ notably. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 per core and 1.25 MB of L2 per core, with 10 MB of shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB of L1 per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 8 MB of shared L3. The Intel chip thus has larger per-core caches and a larger total L3 pool. The AMD die size is recorded at 208 mm², while Intel's die size is not listed in the database.

Both processors support dual-channel memory, but their memory compatibility differs. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while AMD supports only DDR5. AMD records a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s; Intel's bandwidth figure is not listed. PCIe lane counts also diverge: Intel provides 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes from the CPU, while AMD offers 20 PCIe Gen 4 lanes.

Integrated graphics differ in branding and execution units. Intel pairs the Core 3 100U with UHD Graphics 64EU, while AMD uses the Radeon 660M. The AMD part also includes ECC memory support, a feature absent from the Intel chip. Both processors have locked multipliers and target the mobile market segment. Intel's release date is recorded as 2024-01-07, while AMD's is 2023-01-03.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U dominates in standard productivity and data-centric workloads. It wins 12 of the 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons. The largest AMD victories come in extended instruction handling (23.5% ahead), data encryption (12.9% ahead), and data compression (6.7% ahead). These results indicate that the AMD chip excels in tasks involving cryptographic operations, compressed file handling, and vectorized instruction sets. The AMD part also takes narrow wins in all six Cinebench tests, suggesting consistent strength across both single-core and multi-core rendering workloads.

The Intel Core 3 100U wins 5 of the 17 comparisons, with its advantages concentrated in specific computational patterns. The Intel chip leads massively in prime number finding (44.4% ahead), physics simulation (35.4% ahead), and floating-point math (16.6% ahead). It also wins PassMark single-thread performance by 14.8%. These wins point to strengths in scalar integer loops, physics engines, and floating-point-heavy calculations. The Intel part is the better choice for workloads that depend on single-threaded execution or heavy floating-point arithmetic.

The distribution of wins reveals a clear split: AMD for general multi-threaded productivity and data manipulation, Intel for specialized compute patterns and single-thread responsiveness. The PassMark multithread score is nearly identical (12592 vs 12522), showing that despite different core counts, the overall multithreaded throughput is comparable.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in core count: Intel has 6 cores, AMD has 4. Both have 8 threads. Base clocks diverge significantly: Intel runs at 1.20 GHz, while AMD runs at 3.00 GHz. Boost clocks favor Intel at 4.70 GHz versus AMD's 4.30 GHz. The TDP ratings differ as well: Intel is rated at 15 W, AMD at 28 W.

The process nodes are different: Intel uses 10 nm, AMD uses 6 nm. Foundries differ: Intel fabricates its own chips, AMD uses TSMC. Socket types are incompatible: Intel BGA 1744 versus AMD Socket FP7. The AMD die size is 208 mm²; Intel's is not recorded.

Cache allocations differ across all levels. Intel provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. AMD provides 64 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3. Memory support differs: Intel accepts both DDR4 and DDR5, AMD only DDR5. ECC memory is supported only on AMD. Memory bandwidth is recorded only for AMD at 76.8 GB/s.

PCIe configuration differs: Intel has 8 Gen 4 lanes, AMD has 20 Gen 4 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: Intel UHD Graphics 64EU versus AMD Radeon 660M. Release dates differ by roughly one year: Intel released 2024-01-07, AMD released 2023-01-03. Intel has a recorded launch MSRP of $426; AMD has no launch MSRP listed. The Intel part number is SRMYL, while AMD lists two part numbers: 100-000000537(FP7) and 100-000000549(FP7r2).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U wins all six Cinebench tests, though by narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 multicore, AMD scores 1078 against Intel's 1070, a 0.7% difference. The single-core R15 test shows AMD at 152 versus Intel's 150, a 1.3% gap. Cinebench R20 multicore gives AMD 4495 against 4462, again 0.7% apart. The R20 single-core result is 634 versus 629, an 0.8% margin. Cinebench R23 multicore shows AMD at 10703 versus 10624, 0.7% ahead. The R23 single-core test records AMD at 1511 versus 1499, an 0.8% edge. These Cinebench results indicate that the AMD chip maintains a slight but consistent advantage in both rendering and single-threaded workloads.

The largest AMD win comes in PassMark extended instructions, where AMD scores 10314 against Intel's 7894, a 23.5% advantage. This is a substantial gap in workloads that leverage advanced SIMD and specialized instruction sets. AMD also wins PassMark data encryption by 12.9% (9335 versus 8128) and data compression by 6.7% (146309 versus 136497). In integer math, AMD leads by 6.9% (42493 versus 39580). The PassMark multithread score goes to AMD at 12592 versus 12522, a 0.6% margin. Random string sorting also favors AMD at 15361 versus 15191, a 1.1% difference.

The Intel Core 3 100U claims its largest victory in PassMark find prime numbers, scoring 52 against AMD's 36, a 44.4% advantage. This is the most decisive single result in the entire comparison. Intel also wins PassMark physics by 35.4% (876 versus 647), a strong indicator for physics-based computations. In floating-point math, Intel leads by 16.6% (28322 versus 24298). The PassMark single-thread test (recorded twice in the database with identical scores) shows Intel at 3506 versus AMD's 3053, a 14.8% advantage.

The overall win count stands at 12 for AMD and 5 for Intel. The average benchmark scores reflect this: AMD at 16827, Intel at 16148. The nearest rival data places each chip in similar company: Intel's closest rival is the Intel Core i7-10850H with a 0.3% higher average score, while AMD's closest rival is the Intel Core i3-12100E with a 0.2% higher average score.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen 3 7335U is the stronger all-around performer for most users. It wins the majority of benchmarks, holds a higher average score, and achieves this with fewer physical cores. The AMD chip is particularly well-suited for data compression, encryption, and extended instruction workloads, where its advantages range from 6.7% to 23.5%. For users running productivity suites, database operations, or any workload involving data manipulation, the AMD part is the clear choice based on recorded measurements.

The Intel Core 3 100U is the better option for specific computational profiles. Its 44.4% lead in prime number finding and 35.4% lead in physics simulation indicate strengths in single-threaded scalar and floating-point workloads. The 14.8% advantage in PassMark single-thread performance also suggests snappier responsiveness for lightly threaded applications. Users whose workloads are dominated by floating-point math, physics calculations, or single-threaded legacy software would benefit more from the Intel chip.

For thermal and power-sensitive designs, the Intel part operates at a 15 W TDP versus AMD's 28 W, which may influence platform decisions even though the database does not record real-world power consumption. The Intel chip also offers DDR4 compatibility, which could matter for systems reusing existing memory modules. The AMD chip counters with ECC support, higher PCIe lane count (20 versus 8), and a smaller 6 nm process node.

The overall benchmark picture shows two chips that are closely matched in raw multithreaded throughput, with PassMark multithread scores within 0.6% of each other. The decisive differences lie in workload specialization: AMD for data-centric and instruction-heavy tasks, Intel for physics, floating-point, and single-threaded performance. Users should select based on their dominant workload patterns rather than expecting a universal winner. The AMD Ryzen 3 7335U is the safer default recommendation from the recorded data, while the Intel Core 3 100U serves niche but well-defined use cases.