AMD Ryzen 5 3501U vs Intel Core 7 160HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark scores for the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U and the Intel Core 7 160HL. The AMD processor has a complete set of PassMark results, while the Intel part has no recorded benchmark entries in the database. This asymmetry makes a direct score-by-score comparison impossible from the recorded data alone.

What the data does show is the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U's absolute performance profile across eleven distinct PassMark tests. The processor scores 7,071 in multithreaded performance, 2,136 in single-thread performance, 26,321 in integer math, 12,707 in floating point math, and 87,380 in data compression. These figures place the Ryzen 5 3501U at the 69th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 14,320.

The nearest rivals for the Ryzen 5 3501U provide useful context for its standing. The AMD Ryzen Embedded V2546 scores 14,336 on average, which is 0.1% higher than the Ryzen 5 3501U's 14,320. The AMD Ryzen 3 7320C sits 0.3% lower at 14,277. The Intel Core 7 160UL, a sibling of the 160HL in the same Core 7 family, scores 14,232, which is 0.6% behind the Ryzen 5 3501U. The Intel Core i5-10400F trails by 1% with a score of 14,185.

For the Intel Core 7 160HL, the database lists an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50. With no recorded benchmark results, the only quantitative statements possible about the 160HL come from its specification fields, not from measured performance. The percentile rank of 50 indicates the database has placed it at the median of all CPUs, but without test data, this rank cannot be interpreted as a performance result.

The lack of head-to-head results means the analysis must rely on architectural and specification differences to infer likely performance relationships. The Ryzen 5 3501U's measured scores show a processor that handles integer workloads well, with data compression being its strongest absolute result at 87,380. The single-thread score of 2,136 is moderate, suggesting that the 3501U is not a leader in lightly threaded tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design generations and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U uses the Picasso codename, built on the Zen+ architecture, and is manufactured on a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries. The Intel Core 7 160HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS variant, and is manufactured on a 10 nm process at Intel.

Transistor counts and die sizes differ significantly. The Ryzen 5 3501U contains 4,940 million transistors on a 210 mm² die. The Intel Core 7 160HL has no recorded transistor count or die size in the database, leaving that portion of the comparison incomplete.

Core and thread configurations show a dramatic difference. The Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning it does not support simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core 7 160HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, indicating a hybrid architecture with a mix of performance and efficiency cores. The Intel part also runs at higher clock speeds, with a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, compared to the Ryzen's 2.10 GHz base and 3.70 GHz boost.

Cache hierarchies reflect the generational gap. The Ryzen 5 3501U has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 512 KB of L2 cache per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 7 160HL has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part's L3 cache is six times larger, and its per-core L2 cache is four times larger.

Memory support also differs. The Ryzen 5 3501U supports only DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The Intel Core 7 160HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, though the database does not record a memory bandwidth figure for it.

PCI Express capabilities separate the two as well. The Ryzen 5 3501U uses PCIe Gen 3, while the Intel Core 7 160HL uses PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes available to the CPU. The integrated graphics differ, with the AMD part featuring Radeon Vega 8 and the Intel part featuring Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units.

The power envelopes are notably different. The Ryzen 5 3501U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core 7 160HL has a TDP of 45 watts. This threefold difference in power consumption aligns with the desktop market segment for the Intel part versus the mobile segment for the AMD part.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the recorded data, the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U wins in scenarios where its measured benchmark results apply. Its multithreaded score of 7,071 and single-thread score of 2,136 indicate it can handle moderate productivity workloads, and its data compression score of 87,380 suggests it performs well in compression and archiving tasks. The integer math score of 26,321 points to reasonable performance in general-purpose computing.

The Ryzen 5 3501U's 15-watt TDP gives it a clear advantage in power-constrained environments. The database places it in the mobile market segment, and its low power draw makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops or fanless designs. Its 69th percentile ranking among all CPUs indicates that despite its modest core count, it outperforms a majority of processors in the database.

The Intel Core 7 160HL wins on paper in every specification category that predicts performance. Its 14 cores and 20 threads dwarf the Ryzen's 4 cores and 4 threads. Its 5.20 GHz boost clock is substantially higher than the Ryzen's 3.70 GHz. Its 24 MB of L3 cache exceeds the Ryzen's 4 MB by a factor of six. Its support for DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 4 provides modern connectivity options that the Ryzen lacks.

The Intel part is classified as a desktop processor, while the AMD part is classified as mobile. This suggests the Intel Core 7 160HL is designed for higher-performance desktop systems where power consumption is less of a concern, while the Ryzen 5 3501U targets portable devices. The 45-watt TDP of the Intel part indicates it can sustain higher performance levels, but it requires adequate cooling.

For users prioritizing energy efficiency and portability, the Ryzen 5 3501U's 15-watt TDP and mobile classification make it the clear choice. For users prioritizing raw compute capacity, the Intel Core 7 160HL's core count, clock speed, and cache size point to superior performance, though the absence of measured benchmarks means this remains an inference from specifications rather than a confirmed result.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every recorded specification field. The Ryzen 5 3501U uses an AMD Socket FP5, while the Intel Core 7 160HL uses an Intel Socket 1700. The Ryzen is from the 3000 series and the Picasso generation, while the Intel part is from the Raptor Lake-PS generation.

Core counts differ: 4 cores and 4 threads for the AMD, 14 cores and 20 threads for the Intel. Base clocks are 2.10 GHz versus 2.50 GHz, and boost clocks are 3.70 GHz versus 5.20 GHz. TDP ratings are 15 watts versus 45 watts.

Cache configurations differ in all three levels. The AMD has 96 KB L1 per core, 512 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. The Intel has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 24 MB shared L3.

Memory support differs: the AMD supports only DDR4, while the Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is recorded as 38.4 GB/s for the AMD, with no figure for the Intel. PCIe support is Gen 3 for the AMD and Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes for the Intel.

Integrated graphics differ: Radeon Vega 8 for the AMD, Iris Xe Graphics 96EU for the Intel. The AMD is in the mobile market segment, the Intel in the desktop segment. The AMD has a recorded release date of May 2026, while the Intel has a release date of April 2024. The AMD part number is YM3501C4T4MFG, while the Intel part number is listed as unknown.

Neither processor has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The AMD uses a 12 nm process at GlobalFoundries, while the Intel uses a 10 nm process at Intel. Both support dual-channel memory, and neither supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 7 160HL has 14 cores and 20 threads, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the Intel Core 7 160HL has a TDP of 45 watts.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 7 160HL has 24 MB of shared L3 cache, which is six times larger than the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U's 4 MB.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U supports only DDR4 memory, while the Intel Core 7 160HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 160HL has a boost clock of 5.20 GHz, compared to the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U's boost clock of 3.70 GHz.

Q: What are the market segments for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is classified as a mobile processor, while the Intel Core 7 160HL is classified as a desktop processor.

Q: Which processor has recorded benchmark scores in the database?

A: Only the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has recorded benchmark scores. The Intel Core 7 160HL has no benchmark entries, with an average score of 0 recorded.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear but incomplete picture. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has a full set of measured benchmark results, placing it at the 69th percentile of all CPUs with an average score of 14,320. Its nearest rivals, including the Intel Core 7 160UL, score within 1% of the AMD part, indicating that the 3501U sits in a competitive mid-range performance band.

The Intel Core 7 160HL has no measured benchmark results, so its performance cannot be directly confirmed. However, its specification sheet suggests a substantially different performance class. With 14 cores, 20 threads, a 5.20 GHz boost clock, and 24 MB of L3 cache, the Intel part is designed for workloads that scale with core count and cache capacity. The 45-watt TDP and desktop market segment reinforce this interpretation.

Users seeking a low-power processor for mobile devices should select the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U. Its 15-watt TDP, mobile classification, and measured benchmark results confirm it as a capable processor for portable computing. The 69th percentile ranking indicates it outperforms most CPUs in the database despite its modest 4-core configuration.

Users seeking maximum compute capacity in a desktop system should select the Intel Core 7 160HL, based on its specifications. The 14-core, 20-thread configuration, large 24 MB L3 cache, DDR5 support, and PCIe Gen 4 connectivity position it for demanding applications. The absence of benchmark scores means this choice relies on specification analysis rather than measured performance, but the architectural advantages are substantial.

The database records no head-to-head benchmark results between these two processors, so a direct performance comparison cannot be quantified. The Ryzen 5 3501U's measured scores and the Intel Core 7 160HL's specifications indicate they serve different market segments with different performance priorities. The AMD part optimizes for efficiency and portability, while the Intel part optimizes for raw capability and desktop performance.