AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

The Intel Core 3 201E and AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 are both 4-core, 8-thread processors, yet they occupy opposite ends of the computing spectrum: one is a desktop part with a 60 W TDP, the other a mobile chip rated at 28 W. Benchmark results show the Intel part wins 10 of 15 head-to-head tests, but the AMD chip counters with notable single-thread and efficiency advantages. The data paints a picture of two different philosophies—raw sustained throughput on the desktop versus a power-sipping design for laptops—with the Intel Core 3 201E emerging as the dominant performer in multi-core workloads despite the Ryzen AI 5 330's modern 4 nm process node.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core 3 201E is the stronger processor for multi-threaded desktop workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12613 crushes the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330's 7840, a massive 60.9% advantage. This gap repeats across PassMark tests, with Intel leading in integer math (43894 vs 37771, +16.2%), floating-point math (33260 vs 26196, +27%), and physics (1141 vs 705, +61.8%). For anyone building a desktop PC where sustained performance is the priority, the Intel part is the clear choice from the data.

However, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 wins the single-core contest, albeit narrowly. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1812 edges out the Intel's 1780 (+1.8%), and its PassMark single-thread score of 3515 beats 3482 (+0.9%). This suggests the AMD chip has a slight edge in lightly-threaded, latency-sensitive tasks, but the margin is small enough that it rarely justifies choosing it for a desktop build.

The real story is market segment. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 is a mobile processor on Socket FP8 with a 28 W TDP, while the Intel Core 3 201E is a desktop chip on Socket 1700 with a 60 W TDP. The AMD part's lower power draw and newer 4 nm process make it the logical choice for laptops, where thermals and battery life matter more than raw multi-core scores. The Intel part's 60 W TDP and desktop socket mean it belongs in a traditional tower, where the 10 nm node's higher power draw is acceptable. The verdict: desktop builders should pick Intel based on its commanding multi-core lead; laptop buyers should pick AMD for its efficiency and single-thread performance, as the data shows a workable, if not dominant, mobile chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher Cinebench R23 multi-core score?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E scores 12613, which is 60.9% higher than the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330's 7840. This is the largest single benchmark gap in the head-to-head data.

Q: Does the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 ever beat the Intel Core 3 201E?

A: Yes, in 5 of 15 benchmarks. The AMD chip wins Cinebench R15 single-core (199.9 vs 179, +10.5%), Cinebench R23 single-core (1812 vs 1780, +1.8%), PassMark extended instructions (11124 vs 11035, +0.8%), and both PassMark single-thread tests (3515 vs 3482, +0.9%).

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two CPUs?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a 60 W TDP, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 is rated at 28 W. This makes the AMD part more than twice as power-efficient on paper, which is critical for its mobile market segment.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. AMD's LPDDR5X support is typical for mobile parts, and its memory bandwidth is higher at 89.6 GB/s versus Intel's 76.8 GB/s.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 has only 4 MB. This 3x difference in L3 cache likely contributes to Intel's multi-core performance advantage.

Q: Are these processors in the same performance percentile?

A: Yes, both are at the 73rd percentile versus all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are close: 19056 for Intel and 18811 for AMD, a difference of about 1.3%. This suggests that in mixed workloads, they are more similar than the multi-core tests imply.

Architecture Differences

The two chips are built on fundamentally different architectures. The Intel Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry, and is part of the Core 3 generation. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 uses Zen 5 architecture (specifically the Krackan Point 2 codename) on a 4 nm process from TSMC, belonging to the Ryzen AI 300 generation. This process node difference is significant: 4 nm is a much denser, more power-efficient node than 10 nm, which explains why the AMD chip achieves similar single-core performance while drawing less than half the TDP (28 W vs 60 W).

Cache hierarchies also diverge sharply. Both have 80 KB of L1 per core, but the Intel part has 1.25 MB of L2 per core versus AMD's 1 MB per core, and the L3 cache difference is dramatic: 12 MB shared on Intel versus 4 MB on AMD. This 3x L3 advantage for Intel is a major factor in its multi-core wins, as more cache reduces memory latency under heavy thread loads. The Intel die size is 163 mm², while AMD's is not listed, but the 4 nm node allows for a much smaller physical footprint.

The integrated graphics differ too: Intel uses UHD Graphics 730, while AMD pairs with Radeon 820M. The AMD part also supports LPDDR5X memory in addition to DDR5, while Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5. Both are dual-channel, but AMD's memory bandwidth is higher at 89.6 GB/s versus 76.8 GB/s. Finally, Intel supports ECC memory (true), while AMD does not (false), and PCIe configurations differ: Intel offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while AMD offers Gen 4 with 14 lanes. The Intel part is a desktop chip on Socket 1700, while AMD is mobile on Socket FP8.

Specification Differences

The core and thread counts are identical: 4 cores and 8 threads for both. However, clock speeds tell a different story. The Intel Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 runs at 2.00 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. Intel's base clock is 80% higher, which is why it sustains performance better in multi-core tests; AMD's lower base clock is a trade-off for its 28 W TDP.

The process node is a stark difference: Intel is on 10 nm, AMD on 4 nm, with AMD using TSMC as the foundry versus Intel's own fab. The L2 cache per core is 1.25 MB on Intel versus 1 MB on AMD, and L3 is 12 MB versus 4 MB. Memory support differs as noted: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X. ECC memory is supported on Intel but not AMD. The PCIe version and lanes differ: Intel Gen 5 with 16 lanes, AMD Gen 4 with 14 lanes. The TDP is 60 W for Intel and 28 W for AMD, reflecting their desktop versus mobile designations. The release dates also differ: Intel launched on 2025-01-12, while AMD launched on 2025-07-15. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $134, and AMD has no listed launch MSRP. Both have locked multipliers and are actively in production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R23 multi-core test is the single most decisive benchmark in this comparison. The Intel Core 3 201E scores 12613 versus the AMD's 7840, a 60.9% lead that dwarfs all other differences. This is a massive gap, suggesting that Intel's higher base clock and larger L3 cache provide a sustained performance advantage that AMD's 4 nm process cannot overcome. The physics test in PassMark shows a similar blowout: Intel scores 1141 versus AMD's 705, a 61.8% delta. These two tests alone make the case for Intel in any CPU-bound desktop workload.

Intel also dominates in arithmetic and encryption workloads. In PassMark integer math, Intel scores 43894 versus 37771, a 16.2% lead. In floating-point math, Intel wins 33260 versus 26196, a 27% advantage. Data encryption shows Intel ahead at 8931 versus 7251, a 23.2% margin. Prime number finding is another Intel win: 57 versus 42, a 35.7% lead. Multithread performance in PassMark also favors Intel: 14839 versus 12797, a 16% delta. Data compression is closer but still Intel's: 164160 versus 152012, an 8% win. Random string sorting goes to Intel at 17783 versus 16188, a 9.9% margin.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 wins the single-core tests, but by narrow margins. In Cinebench R15 single-core, AMD scores 199.9 versus Intel's 179, a 10.5% lead that is the largest AMD win. In Cinebench R23 single-core, AMD leads 1812 versus 1780, a 1.8% margin. The PassMark single-thread test shows AMD at 3515 versus 3482, a 0.9% edge, and the extended instructions test is nearly a tie, with AMD at 11124 versus 11035, a 0.8% lead. These wins are consistent but small, indicating that AMD's Zen 5 architecture has a slight IPC advantage, but not enough to offset Intel's clock speed and cache advantages in multi-threaded scenarios.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 201E wins in every multi-threaded and computational workload. Its 60.9% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core, 61.8% lead in PassMark physics, and 27% lead in floating-point math make it the clear choice for rendering, scientific computing, and any task that scales across multiple threads. The 35.7% advantage in prime number finding and 23.2% in encryption further cement its position for data-intensive desktop workloads. The 16% lead in PassMark multithread and 16.2% in integer math suggest it handles general productivity tasks with more headroom. Its 12 MB L3 cache and 4.80 GHz boost clock are the likely drivers of these wins, giving it a sustained performance profile that the AMD chip cannot match.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 330 wins in single-thread performance and efficiency. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1812 and PassMark single-thread score of 3515 indicate it has a slight edge in lightly-threaded tasks like web browsing, office applications, and older games that rely on single-core speed. The 10.5% lead in Cinebench R15 single-core is its most convincing victory, suggesting that its Zen 5 architecture has a real IPC advantage. However, the narrow margins (0.9% to 1.8% in most single-thread tests) mean this is not a decisive win. More importantly, its 28 W TDP versus Intel's 60 W makes it the only sensible choice for laptops, where battery life and thermals are paramount. The 4 nm process node and LPDDR5X memory support reinforce this mobile-first design. For users who need a processor that sips power and handles single-threaded tasks with a slight edge, the AMD part wins. For everyone else building a desktop, the Intel part's 10 out of 15 benchmark victories, including all major multi-core tests, make it the data-backed winner.