AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D vs Intel Core 3 201TE Comparison

# Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results for the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D and the Intel Core 3 201TE. The head-to-head array is empty, and neither processor registers a win count. This absence of comparative measurements is itself informative: the two CPUs occupy entirely different tiers of the performance spectrum, as reflected by their aggregate scores and percentile rankings.

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D holds an average benchmark score of 97,453 across its suite of tests, placing it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen Threadripper PRO 5965WX (average score 98,504, 1.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen 9 PRO 9945 (96,083, 1.4% behind), the AMD EPYC 4565P (95,764, 1.8% behind), and the AMD EPYC 9175F (95,615, 1.9% behind). These deltas are narrow, indicating that the 9955HX3D sits in a tightly contested performance band among high-end workstation and server-class parts.

The Intel Core 3 201TE, by contrast, holds an average benchmark score of 0 and sits at the 50th percentile. It has no recorded benchmarks and no nearest rivals in the database. The contrast could not be starker: one processor delivers multi-threaded and single-threaded scores that rank near the top of the entire database, while the other has no measured performance data at all.

For the Ryzen 9 9955HX3D specifically, the individual benchmark results are extensive. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 38,161.5, while its single-core score is 2,159.5. In the older Cinebench R15 test, it records 6,042.5 multi-core and 332 single-core. These figures place it in a class that rivals high-core-count workstation processors, as the nearest rival deltas confirm.

The PassMark suite adds further detail. The 9955HX3D scores 785,811 in data compression, 39,446 in data encryption, 62,813 in extended instructions, 525 in prime number finding, 144,122 in floating point math, 222,503 in integer math, 62,674 in multithread, 4,687 in physics, 83,497 in random string sorting, and 4,511 in single-thread performance. The single-thread and single-threaded entries both record 4,511, confirming consistency.

The Intel Core 3 201TE has no corresponding benchmark entries. Without direct head-to-head results, the database cannot produce a win/loss tally. What the data does show is that the Ryzen 9 9955HX3D generates a rich set of performance measurements across rendering and synthetic workloads, while the Core 3 201TE remains unmeasured. Any comparative analysis must therefore rely on architectural specifications and the stark percentile gap: 96 versus 50.

# Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge fundamentally in architecture, node, and design philosophy. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D uses the Zen 5 architecture on the Fire Range codename, built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. It integrates 16,630 million transistors across a two-die configuration with each die measuring 70.6 mm². The Intel Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename on a 10 nm process at Intel, with a single die measuring 163 mm². The transistor count for the Intel part is not recorded.

Core and thread counts differ by a factor of four. The AMD part offers 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel part offers 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies also diverge sharply. Both use 80 KB of L1 per core. The AMD part uses 1 MB of L2 per core, while the Intel part uses 1.25 MB per core. The L3 cache is the most dramatic difference: the AMD part has 128 MB total, while the Intel part has 12 MB shared. That is more than a tenfold difference in last-level cache capacity.

Clock speeds show a different trade-off. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.50 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Intel part has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz but a lower boost of 4.60 GHz. The thermal design power also differs: 55 W for the AMD part versus 45 W for the Intel part. Neither TDP figure is extreme, but the AMD part draws more under load while delivering substantially more compute resources.

Memory support separates the two as well. The AMD part supports DDR5 only, with dual-channel memory and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. Both support ECC memory. PCIe connectivity differs: the AMD part provides Gen 5 with 28 lanes from the CPU, while the Intel part provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Integrated graphics also differ. The AMD part includes Radeon 610M, while the Intel part includes UHD Graphics 730. The AMD processor is unlocked for overclocking, while the Intel part is locked. The AMD part targets the mobile segment and uses AMD Socket FL1, while the Intel part targets the desktop segment and uses Intel Socket 1700.

The release dates are close, with the AMD part dated January 5, 2025, and the Intel part dated January 12, 2025. Both are listed as active in production. The AMD part carries part number 100-000001030, while the Intel part carries SRPKDQ5CK. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $134, while the AMD part has no recorded MSRP.

# The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on workload class. The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D delivers top-tier multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, ranking in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. Its 16 cores, 32 threads, and 128 MB of L3 cache position it for heavy parallel workloads such as rendering, simulation, and data processing. Its nearest rivals are all high-core-count workstation or server processors, and the deltas among them are small, meaning the 9955HX3D competes at the very top of the database.

The Intel Core 3 201TE offers a fundamentally different proposition. With 4 cores, 8 threads, and 12 MB of L3 cache, it is a low-power desktop part with a 45 W TDP and a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which gives it flexibility for legacy and modern platforms. However, with no recorded benchmarks and a 50th percentile rank, the database cannot confirm any performance advantage.

For users whose workloads align with the measured strengths of the AMD part, the choice is clear. The Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has extensive benchmark data showing high scores across Cinebench and PassMark suites. For users who need a modest desktop processor with ECC support, dual memory type compatibility, and a low launch MSRP, the Intel Core 3 201TE is the only option with a recorded price.

The data does not support a direct recommendation for the Intel part on performance grounds, as no measurements exist. The AMD part, by contrast, has a full set of scores that place it among the fastest processors in the database.

# Specification Differences

| Specification | AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D | Intel Core 3 201TE |

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

| Cores | 16 | 4 |

| Threads | 32 | 8 |

| Base clock | 2.50 GHz | 2.90 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.40 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 55 W | 45 W |

| Socket | AMD Socket FL1 | Intel Socket 1700 |

| Architecture | Zen 5 | Not recorded |

| Codename | Fire Range | Bartlett Lake |

| Process node | 4 nm | 10 nm |

| Foundry | TSMC | Intel |

| Die size | 2x 70.6 mm² | 163 mm² |

| L2 cache | 1 MB per core | 1.25 MB per core |

| L3 cache | 128 MB | 12 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR5 | DDR4, DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | 89.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 28 lanes | Gen 5, 16 lanes |

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

| Market segment | Mobile | Desktop |

| Multiplier unlocked | Yes | No |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $134 |

# FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has 16 cores and 32 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: How does the L3 cache compare between the two?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has 128 MB of L3 cache, while the Intel Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D and the Intel Core 3 201TE support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor supports DDR4 memory?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D supports DDR5 only.

Q: What are the process nodes for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC, while the Intel Core 3 201TE is built on a 10 nm process at Intel.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D has a boost clock of 5.40 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201TE has a boost clock of 4.60 GHz.

# Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D wins decisively on raw compute capacity. Its 16 cores and 32 threads, combined with 128 MB of L3 cache and a 5.40 GHz boost clock, produce benchmark scores that place it in the 96th percentile of all CPUs. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 38,161.5, and in PassMark multithread, it scores 62,674. Its nearest rivals are all high-end workstation or server processors, with deltas of roughly 1% to 2%, meaning the 9955HX3D is effectively at parity with some of the fastest parts in the database. It also leads on memory bandwidth at 89.6 GB/s, PCIe lane count at 28 Gen 5 lanes, and it is multiplier unlocked for overclocking.

The Intel Core 3 201TE wins on power efficiency and platform flexibility. Its 45 W TDP is lower than the 55 W of the AMD part, and its base clock of 2.90 GHz is higher, suggesting better performance per watt at low utilization. It supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, which makes it compatible with a wider range of motherboards and memory kits. Its integrated UHD Graphics 730 provides a desktop graphics solution, and its launch MSRP of $134 is the only recorded price between the two. The Intel part also uses the Intel Socket 1700, which is a desktop platform, while the AMD part uses the mobile-oriented AMD Socket FL1.

For workloads that are heavily parallel, such as rendering, encoding, or scientific computation, the AMD Ryzen 9 9955HX3D is the only part with measured performance data to support such use. For light desktop tasks, legacy memory support, or low-power operation, the Intel Core 3 201TE has the specification-level advantages. The database does not contain direct head-to-head results, so the win split is determined by the existence and magnitude of benchmark scores on one side and the architectural flexibility on the other.