CPU Comparison

The Intel Core 3 201E and AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS sit at nearly identical average scores, 19056 versus 19047, but the similarity ends there. These two processors deliver their performance in fundamentally different ways, with the Intel part winning six head-to-head tests and the AMD part taking nine. The data reveals a split personality: Intel excels in single-threaded bursts and specific physics workloads, while AMD dominates in raw multi-threaded throughput and data-heavy tasks. Neither chip is a universal winner, which makes the choice entirely dependent on the workload.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is the clear multi-threaded workhorse. It wins the passmark_multithread test with a score of 17914 against 14839, a 17.2% margin. Its advantage grows in integer math, where it scores 62372 versus 43894, a 29.6% lead. Data compression shows an even larger gap: 221668 versus 164160, a 25.9% win. The AMD part also takes encryption (13656 vs 8931, +34.6%), extended instructions (15411 vs 11035, +28.4%), random string sorting (22781 vs 17783, +21.9%), and floating-point math (35540 vs 33260, +6.4%). These wins cluster around workloads that scale with core count and memory bandwidth, which aligns with its 6-core, 12-thread configuration.

The Intel Core 3 201E wins where single-thread performance or specialized execution matters. It takes passmark_single_thread with 3482 versus 3123, an 11.5% lead. Its cinebench_r23_singlecore score of 1780 beats 1445 by 23.2%. The Intel part also wins cinebench_r23_multicore (12613 vs 8613, +46.4%), a surprising result given its 4-core, 8-thread layout. It wins passmark_physics (1141 vs 844, +35.2%) and passmark_find_prime_numbers (57 vs 49, +16.3%). The physics and prime-number wins suggest the Intel part handles certain algorithmic patterns more efficiently, even when outnumbered by cores.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gulf between these two is wide. The Intel Core 3 201E uses Bartlett Lake on a 10 nm Intel process, built on the Socket 1700 platform. It packs 4 cores and 8 threads with a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost of 4.80 GHz, drawing 60 W TDP. Its cache layout is distinctive: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The die size is 163 mm². Memory support spans DDR4 and DDR5, dual-channel, with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth and ECC support. It uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes and integrates UHD Graphics 730.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is a mobile chip on Socket FP7, using Zen 3+ (Rembrandt-R) built on a 6 nm TSMC process. It offers 6 cores and 12 threads with a lower base clock of 3.30 GHz and boost of 4.55 GHz, but a much lower 35 W TDP. Its cache is smaller per core, 64 KB L1 and 512 KB L2, but larger shared L3 at 16 MB. The die is larger at 208 mm². It supports only DDR5, dual-channel, with the same 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, but no ECC. It uses PCIe Gen 4 with 20 lanes and integrates Radeon 660M graphics. The process node difference (6 nm vs 10 nm) and the core count disparity (6 vs 4) explain much of the performance split.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The biggest win for the Intel Core 3 201E is in cinebench_r23_multicore, where it scores 12613 versus 8613, a massive 46.4% advantage. This is the largest delta in either direction. The Intel part also leads in cinebench_r23_singlecore by 23.2% (1780 vs 1445), passmark_physics by 35.2% (1141 vs 844), and passmark_single_thread by 11.5% (3482 vs 3123). These wins show that the Intel chip’s higher boost clock (4.80 vs 4.55 GHz) and possibly better instruction scheduling give it an edge in latency-sensitive tasks.

The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS counters with its own set of decisive wins. The largest is passmark_data_encryption at 34.6% (13656 vs 8931). It also takes passmark_integer_math by 29.6% (62372 vs 43894), passmark_extended_instructions by 28.4% (15411 vs 11035), and passmark_data_compression by 25.9% (221668 vs 164160). The AMD part wins passmark_random_string_sorting by 21.9% (22781 vs 17783) and passmark_multithread by 17.2% (17914 vs 14839). In cinebench_r15, the AMD part wins both multicore (1457 vs 1271, +12.8%) and singlecore (232 vs 179, +22.8%). The AMD’s smaller margin in floating-point math (35540 vs 33260, +6.4%) is its narrowest win.

The pattern is consistent: AMD wins when more cores can be utilized, Intel wins when clock speed and per-thread efficiency matter. The cinebench_r23 multicore result is the outlier, suggesting that the Intel part’s architecture handles that specific workload far better than the core count would imply.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has an average benchmark score of 19056, while the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS scores 19047. The difference is 9 points, or effectively zero, the nearestRivals data lists a deltaPct of 0 for both when compared to each other.

Q: Why does the 4-core Intel chip win cinebench_r23_multicore by such a large margin?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E scores 12613 in cinebench_r23_multicore versus 8613 for the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS, a 46.4% advantage. This happens despite the AMD part having 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel chip’s 4.80 GHz boost clock and 12 MB shared L3 cache likely contribute, but the benchmark data alone shows the Intel part handles this specific workload far better.

Q: Which processor is better for data compression and encryption?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is clearly superior. It scores 221668 in data compression versus 164160 for Intel (25.9% higher), and 13656 in data encryption versus 8931 (34.6% higher). These are among the AMD part’s largest wins.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any multi-threaded tests?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 3 201E wins cinebench_r23_multicore with 12613 versus 8613, a 46.4% lead. It also wins passmark_physics (1141 vs 844, +35.2%) and passmark_find_prime_numbers (57 vs 49, +16.3%). However, it loses passmark_multithread (14839 vs 17914, -17.2%) and cinebench_r15_multicore (1271 vs 1457, -12.8%).

Q: How do the single-thread scores compare?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E wins passmark_single_thread with 3482 versus 3123, an 11.5% lead. In cinebench_r23_singlecore, Intel wins 1780 versus 1445, a 23.2% margin. However, in cinebench_r15_singlecore, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS wins 232 versus 179, a 22.8% lead. This inconsistency suggests the benchmark version matters.

Q: Which chip has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite this, the Intel chip wins 6 of 15 head-to-head tests, including the largest single win (cinebench_r23_multicore).

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS |

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

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 3.30 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.55 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | AMD Socket FP7 |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 6 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Die Size | 163 mm² | 208 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 512 KB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 16 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes | Gen 4, 20 Lanes |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Radeon 660M |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2023-01-03 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | N/A |

The Verdict

The data points to a clear workload-based split. For users running data compression, encryption, integer math, or any task that scales with core count, the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS is the better choice. Its 6 cores and 12 threads deliver consistent 17% to 35% wins across these workloads, making it the superior multi-threaded processor for most compute-heavy tasks.

For users prioritizing single-thread performance, physics simulations, or the specific cinebench_r23 workload, the Intel Core 3 201E is the pick. Its 11.5% single-thread lead and 46.4% cinebench_r23 multicore win show that raw core count is not the only factor. The Intel chip also offers ECC memory support, DDR4 compatibility, and PCIe Gen 5, which may matter for specific desktop use cases.

The overall average scores are nearly identical, 19056 for Intel versus 19047 for AMD, so the choice is not about which chip is faster on average. It is about which workloads matter most. The AMD part wins 9 of 15 head-to-head tests, but the Intel part wins the largest single test by a wide margin. The Intel chip’s higher TDP (60 W vs 35 W) suggests it is designed for desktop power delivery, while the AMD part’s mobile segment and lower TDP indicate efficiency-focused designs. Neither is a default winner; the benchmark data demands that the user match the processor to the task.