AMD Ryzen 5 3501U vs Intel Core i3-14100F Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a clear hierarchy between these two processors. The Intel Core i3-14100F wins all 11 recorded head-to-head comparisons, with no benchmark victories for the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 18519, compared to 14320 for the AMD part, a difference that places the Intel chip at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs while the AMD chip sits at the 69th percentile. The Intel Core i3-14100F is the choice for any workload where raw compute throughput matters, from data compression to floating-point mathematics. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U, by contrast, is a mobile-oriented part with integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, making it suitable for systems that need the CPU and GPU in a single low-power package. The data does not support selecting the AMD part for performance reasons; its utility lies entirely in its mobile form factor and integrated graphics capability.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-14100F records a PassMark single-thread score of 3778, while the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U records 2136. The Intel part leads by 43.5% in this metric.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-14100F scores 15420 in PassMark multithread testing, against 7071 for the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U. This represents a 54.1% advantage for the Intel processor.

Q: Does the AMD processor include integrated graphics?

A: Yes, the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U includes Radeon Vega 8 integrated graphics. The Intel Core i3-14100F has no integrated graphics (listed as N/A), so it requires a discrete GPU.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U supports DDR4 memory only. The Intel Core i3-14100F supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, both in dual-channel configuration.

Q: When were these processors released?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has a release date of May 31, 2026. The Intel Core i3-14100F was released on January 7, 2024.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Intel Core i3-14100F has a TDP of 58 watts, whereas the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has a TDP of 15 watts. The AMD part is designed for much lower power consumption.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design philosophies and manufacturing backgrounds. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U belongs to the 3000 series and uses the Picasso codename, built on the Zen+ architecture. Its generation is listed as "Ryzen 5 (Zen+ (Picasso))". The Intel Core i3-14100F is a Core 14th Gen part with the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-R, and its generation is listed as "Core i3 (Raptor Lake Refresh)".

The manufacturing process differs substantially. AMD uses a 12 nm process node from GlobalFoundries, while Intel uses a 10 nm process from its own foundry. The AMD die measures 210 mm² and contains 4,940 million transistors. The Intel die is smaller at 163 mm², and no transistor count is recorded in the database.

Cache organization reveals a fundamental design difference. The AMD processor allocates 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 cache per core, with 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel processor uses 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part thus has three times the L3 cache capacity, which contributes to its performance in cache-sensitive workloads.

The memory support also diverges. AMD supports only DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel configuration, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. ECC memory support is present on the Intel part but absent on the AMD part. PCIe connectivity differs as well: AMD uses Gen 3, while Intel uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

The market positioning is explicit in the data. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U is a mobile processor on AMD Socket FP5, while the Intel Core i3-14100F is a desktop processor on Intel Socket 1700. The integrated graphics situation reinforces this: AMD includes Radeon Vega 8, while Intel has none.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts differ despite both being quad-core designs. The AMD Ryzen 5 3501U has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading. The Intel Core i3-14100F has 4 cores and 8 threads, doubling the thread count through Hyper-Threading technology. This directly explains much of the multithreaded performance gap.

Clock speeds favor Intel substantially. The AMD base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. The Intel base clock is 3.50 GHz with a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. Both the base and boost figures are higher on the Intel part, and the boost ceiling is a full 1.0 GHz higher.

Power consumption is a major differentiator. The AMD TDP is 15 watts, typical for a mobile processor. The Intel TDP is 58 watts, reflecting its desktop orientation and higher performance envelope. The AMD part is unlocked for multiplier adjustment? No, both processors have multiplierUnlocked set to false.

The launch MSRP for the Intel Core i3-14100F is $109. No launch MSRP is recorded for the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U.

The part numbers differ: the AMD part is YM3501C4T4MFG, and the Intel part is SRMX2. Both are listed as Active in production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i3-14100F wins every recorded comparison. The largest margin comes in PassMark extended instructions, where Intel scores 11984 against AMD's 3274, a 72.7% advantage. This test measures SIMD and specialized instruction throughput, and the gap reflects both the newer architecture and the higher clock speeds.

PassMark find prime numbers shows Intel at 61 versus AMD at 21, a 65.6% lead. This is a heavily integer-bound test that benefits from the Intel part's higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus 3.70 GHz. Floating-point math follows a similar pattern: Intel scores 35370, AMD scores 12707, a 64.1% difference. The floating-point result is particularly notable because the AMD part has a Radeon Vega 8 integrated GPU that could theoretically offload some math work, but the CPU-only benchmark shows Intel's dominance.

The multithread score of 15420 for Intel versus 7071 for AMD represents a 54.1% difference. With 8 threads against 4 threads, the Intel part has a structural advantage that no amount of architectural efficiency on the AMD side can overcome. The physics test shows Intel at 1077 versus AMD at 483, a 55.2% lead, which aligns with the multithread result.

Data compression shows Intel at 176106 versus AMD at 87380, a 50.4% difference. This workload is sensitive to both memory bandwidth and cache capacity, and the Intel part's 12 MB of L3 cache versus 4 MB likely plays a significant role. Data encryption shows a smaller but still decisive gap: Intel at 8922 versus AMD at 5580, a 37.5% lead. Integer math gives Intel 45357 against AMD's 26321, a 42% difference, while random string sorting shows Intel at 17596 versus AMD at 10414, a 40.8% lead.

The single-thread score is worth examining closely because it isolates per-core performance. Intel records 3778, AMD records 2136, a 43.5% difference. This is not merely a thread-count artifact; the Intel core is substantially faster on its own. The base clock advantage of 3.50 GHz versus 2.10 GHz and the boost advantage of 4.70 GHz versus 3.70 GHz explain much of this gap. The Intel architecture also delivers more instructions per clock in this comparison.

The closest margins still favor Intel decisively. Data encryption at 37.5% and random string sorting at 40.8% are the smallest gaps, but both exceed a third of the AMD score. There are no recorded benchmark results where the AMD Ryzen 5 3501U comes within striking distance of the Intel Core i3-14100F. The winsB count of 11 against winsA of 0 accurately summarizes the competitive landscape. Buyers choosing between these two parts should base the decision not on performance, where the AMD part is uniformly slower, but on the platform requirements: the AMD part offers a 15-watt mobile package with integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Intel part delivers desktop-class performance with a 58-watt TDP and requires a discrete GPU.