AMD Ryzen 9 9900X vs Intel Core 3 201TE Comparison

FAQ

Q: Why does the AMD Ryzen 9 9900X have benchmark scores while the Intel Core 3 201TE has none?

A: The database shows the Ryzen 9 9900X has 23 recorded benchmark results across 3DMark, Cinebench, Geekbench, and PassMark. The Intel Core 3 201TE has an empty benchmark array and an average benchmark score of 0. The Core 3 201TE is a newly released part (January 2025) compared to the Ryzen 9 9900X (August 2024), so no tested results exist for it yet in the database.

Q: What is the performance percentile ranking for each processor?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X ranks in the 92nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 201TE ranks in the 50th percentile, which is the median position.

Q: Does the Core 3 201TE support DDR4 memory?

A: Yes. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Ryzen 9 9900X supports DDR5 only. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The Ryzen 9 9900X has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 201TE does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Q: Which processor has integrated graphics, and what are they?

A: Both have integrated graphics. The Ryzen 9 9900X uses Radeon Graphics. The Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two chips?

A: The Ryzen 9 9900X is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Core 3 201TE uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The AMD chip also has a smaller die size of 2x 70.6 mm² versus 163 mm² for the Intel part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design approaches. The Ryzen 9 9900X uses AMD's Zen 5 architecture under the Granite Ridge codename. It is a 12-core, 24-thread chip built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel's Bartlett Lake architecture on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry, offering 4 cores and 8 threads.

The Ryzen 9 9900X uses a chiplet design with two dies, each measuring 70.6 mm². The combined transistor count reaches 16,630 million. The Core 3 201TE uses a monolithic die of 163 mm², and the database does not list a transistor count for it.

Cache layouts differ significantly. Both allocate 80 KB of L1 cache per core. The Ryzen 9 9900X provides 1 MB of L2 per core and 64 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 3 201TE has a larger 1.25 MB L2 per core but only 12 MB of shared L3. This means the AMD chip has over five times the total L3 capacity, which directly benefits workloads with large working sets.

Memory support also diverges. The Ryzen 9 9900X supports DDR5 only, with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity favors the AMD part: Gen 5 with 24 CPU lanes versus Gen 5 with 16 CPU lanes on the Intel chip.

Clock speeds tell a clear story. The Ryzen 9 9900X has a 4.40 GHz base clock and a 5.60 GHz boost clock. The Core 3 201TE runs at 2.90 GHz base and 4.60 GHz boost. The AMD part also carries a 120 W TDP versus 45 W for the Intel part, reflecting the much larger core count and higher clocks.

The Ryzen 9 9900X is unlocked for overclocking and carries the part number 100-000000662. The Core 3 201TE has a locked multiplier and part number SRPKDQ5CK. Both are active production desktop parts. The Ryzen 9 9900X uses AMD Socket AM5; the Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no shared benchmark results between these two processors. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and neither CPU records any wins against the other. The Ryzen 9 9900X has an extensive set of 23 individual test scores. The Core 3 201TE has zero recorded scores.

What the data does show is where the Ryzen 9 9900X stands relative to its nearest rivals in the database. Its average benchmark score is 57,498. The closest competitor is the AMD EPYC 9015 with an average score of 57,555, which is 0.1% behind the Ryzen part. The AMD EPYC 7313 scores 57,399, putting it 0.2% behind. The Intel Core i9-14900 scores 58,115, which is 1.1% ahead of the Ryzen 9 9900X. The Intel Xeon Platinum 8260M scores 58,323, 1.4% ahead.

Within its own benchmark suite, the Ryzen 9 9900X shows strong scaling. Its 3DMark max-threads score of 13,929 is 10.7% higher than its 16-thread score of 12,552. The single-thread 3DMark score is 1,286. In Cinebench R23, the multicore score reaches 32,172 versus 2,253 for single-core. Geekbench shows 22,174 multicore and 3,010 single-core.

PassMark results reveal workload-specific strengths. The data compression score is 683,579, while data encryption scores 33,421. Floating point math hits 120,083, integer math reaches 181,056, and extended instructions score 55,243. Random string sorting produces 72,013. The multithread score is 54,643, and single-thread scores 4,672. Find prime numbers is the weakest result at 436.

Because the Core 3 201TE has no benchmark data, a direct comparison of individual test scores is impossible. The database records its average benchmark score as 0 and its percentile as 50, which is the midpoint of all CPUs. The Ryzen 9 9900X sits at the 92nd percentile.

Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 9900X | Intel Core 3 201TE |

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

| Cores | 12 | 4 |

| Threads | 24 | 8 |

| Base clock | 4.40 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.60 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 120 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket AM5 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Not listed |

| Codename | Granite Ridge | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| Transistors | 16,630 million | Not listed |

| 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 |

| ECC memory | Yes | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 24 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

| Integrated graphics | Radeon Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Release date | August 2024 | January 2025 |

| Launch MSRP | $499 | $134 |

| Part number | 100-000000662 | SRPKDQ5CK |

The core count difference is the most significant specification gap. The Ryzen 9 9900X offers three times the cores and threads of the Core 3 201TE. Clock speeds are also substantially higher on the AMD part, with a 0.7 GHz base clock advantage and a 1.0 GHz boost clock advantage.

Cache configuration favors the Ryzen 9 9900X for total capacity. The Intel part has a per-core L2 advantage of 0.25 MB, but the AMD part holds 64 MB of L3 versus 12 MB. Memory bandwidth is 16.7% higher on the AMD chip. PCIe lane count is 50% higher on the AMD chip.

The power envelope moves in the opposite direction. The Core 3 201TE draws 45 W TDP, which is 75 W less than the Ryzen 9 9900X. This makes the Intel part far more efficient per socket, though the AMD part's performance ceiling is much higher.

Where Each One Wins

The Ryzen 9 9900X wins in every category that requires computational throughput. Its 12 cores and 24 threads provide triple the parallel execution capacity of the Core 3 201TE. The 5.60 GHz boost clock gives it a 1.0 GHz advantage in single-threaded bursts. The 64 MB L3 cache allows it to hold far larger working sets without hitting memory. Its 89.6 GB/s memory bandwidth moves data 16.7% faster than the Intel part's 76.8 GB/s.

The Ryzen 9 9900X also wins on platform flexibility. It offers 24 PCIe Gen 5 lanes versus 16, an unlocked multiplier for overclocking, and a more modern 4 nm process. Its 92nd percentile ranking places it near the top of the entire CPU database. The nearest rivals in its performance class are server-class EPYC and Xeon parts, along with the Core i9-14900, all within 1.4% of its average score.

The Core 3 201TE wins on power consumption and cost of entry. Its 45 W TDP is 62.5% lower than the Ryzen 9 9900X's 120 W. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, giving builders the option to use less expensive DDR4 modules. Its 10 nm process and monolithic die of 163 mm² reflect a simpler, lower-power design.

The Intel part also wins on release timing, being newer by several months. Its launch MSRP is $134, which is listed in the database but the comparison should stay on technical grounds. The locked multiplier means no overclocking headroom, but the low TDP makes it suitable for compact systems where cooling is limited.

In specific workload terms, the Ryzen 9 9900X's PassMark scores show it handles integer math (181,056) and floating point math (120,083) far better than a 4-core part could. The data compression score of 683,579 indicates strong multi-threaded throughput. The Core 3 201TE, with no recorded benchmarks, cannot match any of these figures.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear division of roles. The Ryzen 9 9900X is the high-performance choice. Its 92nd percentile ranking, 12-core configuration, and 5.60 GHz boost clock place it in a different performance class entirely from the Core 3 201TE. The benchmark results show it competing with server processors like the EPYC 9015 and EPYC 7313, while staying within 1.4% of the Core i9-14900 and Xeon Platinum 8260M.

The Core 3 201TE occupies the opposite end of the spectrum. It has no benchmark scores in the database, ranks at the 50th percentile by default, and offers 4 cores and 8 threads. Its strengths are power efficiency and memory flexibility. The 45 W TDP and dual DDR4/DDR5 support make it a plausible choice for low-power builds, but the database contains no performance evidence to support any specific workload claim.

For users who need multi-threaded compute, the Ryzen 9 9900X is the only one of these two with data to back its performance. The 3DMark max-threads score of 13,929, Cinebench R23 multicore score of 32,172, and Geekbench multicore score of 22,174 all reflect a processor built for demanding tasks. The Core 3 201TE cannot be evaluated for such workloads because no measurements exist.

For users who prioritize low power draw, the Core 3 201TE has a clear specification advantage. Its 45 W TDP versus 120 W means less heat and lower cooling requirements. The dual memory support adds flexibility. But the locked multiplier and absence of benchmark data mean its real-world performance remains unquantified in the database.

The practical conclusion from the recorded data: the Ryzen 9 9900X is the performance pick with extensive benchmark coverage, while the Core 3 201TE is a low-power part whose performance has not yet been measured. Anyone selecting between them should base the decision on whether raw compute throughput or minimal power consumption matters more. The benchmark database currently supports only the former.