AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX and the Intel Core 3 201E occupy different corners of the processor market, and their benchmark data reflects a stark performance divide. The Ryzen 9 9850HX, a mobile flagship with 12 cores and 24 threads, dominates the Intel Core 3 201E, a desktop entry-point chip with 4 cores and 8 threads. Across all 11 recorded head-to-head benchmarks, the AMD part wins every single test, with margins ranging from 28.1% to 466.7%. The average benchmark score for the Ryzen 9 9850HX is 106,413, placing it in the 97th percentile of all CPUs, while the Core 3 201E averages 19,056, sitting in the 73rd percentile. These numbers tell a clear story of two processors built for entirely different workloads and performance tiers.

Where Each One Wins

The data is unambiguous: the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX wins every recorded benchmark, so the use-case split is defined by the magnitude of its victories rather than any Intel advantages. The Ryzen 9 9850HX is the choice for any workload that leverages multiple cores or heavy parallel processing. In PassMark multithread testing, the AMD chip scores 51,722 against the Intel part's 14,839, a 248.6% advantage. This translates directly to productivity tasks like video encoding, 3D rendering, scientific simulations, and database operations, where the 12-core/24-thread configuration extracts maximum performance.

The Intel Core 3 201E, despite losing every head-to-head, still has a role in lower-intensity desktop scenarios. Its 4-core/8-thread layout with a 3.60 GHz base clock and 4.80 GHz boost clock is sufficient for basic office work, web browsing, and light application usage. The data shows its single-thread score of 3,482 is respectable for entry-level duties, though it trails the Ryzen 9 9850HX by 28.1%. The Intel chip also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility for budget-oriented system builds, and its 60W TDP is modest, though higher than the AMD part's 55W. The real separation is in heavy workloads: the Ryzen 9 9850HX is a high-performance mobile processor, while the Core 3 201E is a desktop chip for basic tasks where its lower core count is not a bottleneck.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX uses the Zen 5 architecture, codenamed Fire Range, and is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It packs 16,630 million transistors across a dual-chip design with a die size of 2x 70.6 mm². This is a mobile-class chip on the AMD Socket FL1, with a 55W TDP and an unlocked multiplier for overclocking. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and a substantial 64 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is DDR5 with dual-channel access and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory and provides 28 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, alongside integrated Radeon 610M graphics.

The Intel Core 3 201E, in contrast, uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm Intel process, with a die size of 163 mm². It is a desktop chip on the Intel Socket 1700 with a 60W TDP and a locked multiplier, meaning no overclocking. Its cache layout differs significantly: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and only 12 MB of shared L3. Memory support is more flexible with both DDR4 and DDR5, but bandwidth is lower at 76.8 GB/s. It also supports ECC memory and offers 16 PCIe Gen 5 lanes, half the AMD count. Integrated graphics come from the UHD Graphics 730. The process node difference is stark: 4 nm versus 10 nm, which contributes heavily to the performance and efficiency gap. The Ryzen 9 9850HX also has a 5.20 GHz boost clock compared to the Intel's 4.80 GHz, and its base clock of 3.00 GHz is lower but paired with far more cores and threads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results show a pattern of overwhelming AMD dominance, with the smallest margin still a decisive win. In PassMark single-thread testing, the Ryzen 9 9850HX scores 4,461 against the Core 3 201E's 3,482, a 28.1% lead. This is the closest contest on the list, yet it still indicates a clear per-core performance advantage for the Zen 5 architecture. The gap widens dramatically in multi-threaded workloads. The PassMark multithread test shows 51,722 for the AMD part versus 14,839 for Intel, a 248.6% difference. Integer math follows suit: 172,943 versus 43,894, a 294% advantage. Floating-point math shows 115,062 versus 33,260, a 245.9% margin.

The largest single delta comes from the prime number search test, where the Ryzen 9 9850HX scores 323 against Intel's 57, a 466.7% lead. Extended instruction testing shows 53,817 versus 11,035, a 387.7% gap. Data compression results are similarly lopsided: 662,381 versus 164,160, a 303.5% difference. Data encryption shows 32,139 versus 8,931, a 259.9% edge. Random string sorting delivers 70,175 versus 17,783, a 294.6% margin. Even the physics test, which can favor higher clock speeds, shows 3,054 versus 1,141, a 167.7% advantage. Every benchmark confirms the same conclusion: the Ryzen 9 9850HX is between 1.7x and 5.7x faster than the Core 3 201E, with no test where the Intel part comes close to parity.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has 12 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. This 3x core advantage drives the massive multi-threaded performance gap.

Q: What is the boost clock difference between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX boosts up to 5.20 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201E reaches 4.80 GHz. The AMD part also has a lower base clock at 3.00 GHz versus 3.60 GHz for Intel.

Q: How do their cache sizes compare?

A: The Ryzen 9 9850HX has 64 MB of L3 cache, whereas the Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3. L2 cache is also larger on the AMD part at 1 MB per core versus 1.25 MB per core on Intel, but the AMD chip has more cores.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX supports DDR5 only with dual-channel access and 89.6 GB/s bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5 with 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, also dual-channel.

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX averages 106,413, placing it in the 97th percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 201E averages 19,056, in the 73rd percentile. The AMD score is roughly 5.6 times higher.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX has an unlocked multiplier, while the Intel Core 3 201E has a locked multiplier, preventing overclocking on the Intel part.

The Verdict

The data points to a single conclusion: the AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX is in a completely different performance class than the Intel Core 3 201E. For any workload that benefits from multiple cores, from compiling code to rendering frames, the Ryzen 9 9850HX's 12 cores and 24 threads deliver results that the Intel part cannot approach. The 248.6% multi-thread advantage and the 294% integer math lead are not marginal improvements; they represent a processor that finishes heavy tasks in a fraction of the time. Even in single-threaded performance, where the Intel part's higher base clock provides some theoretical benefit, the Zen 5 architecture still wins by 28.1%.

The Intel Core 3 201E is a desktop processor for scenarios where absolute performance is secondary. Its 4 cores and 8 threads handle basic productivity, web applications, and light multitasking. The 73rd percentile ranking places it above average, and its support for both DDR4 and DDR5 makes it a flexible option for simple builds. However, the benchmark data shows no scenario where it outperforms the Ryzen 9 9850HX, making the choice straightforward: the AMD part for performance users, the Intel part for cost-sensitive, low-demand desktop systems. The Ryzen 9 9850HX also carries a higher TDP at 55W, but it is still a mobile processor designed for laptops, while the Core 3 201E is a desktop chip at 60W.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 9850HX | Intel Core 3 201E |

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

| Cores | 12 | 4 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base Clock | 3.00 GHz | 3.60 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 5.20 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 60 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Codename | Fire Range | Bartlett Lake |

| Process Node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die Size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | Not specified |

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

| L2 Cache | 1 MB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 64 MB | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | Radeon 610M | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Market Segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier Unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | Not specified | $134 |