AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 vs Intel Core 3 201TE Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded database contains a full benchmark suite for the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340, while the Intel Core 3 201TE has no benchmark scores listed. This makes a direct score-for-score comparison impossible for the Intel part. The AMD processor’s results can still be analyzed on their own merits and against its nearest rivals, which provides useful context for positioning.

Starting with multi-threaded performance, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 scores 12,532 points in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its single-core result in the same test is 1,915.5 points. In Cinebench R15, the multi-core score is 1,915 and the single-core score is 242.6. These numbers indicate a balanced processor that scales well across both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads.

In Geekbench, the AMD chip records 9,165 for multi-core and 2,140 for single-core. The multi-core figure places it in a competitive range for a 6-core, 12-thread mobile processor. The single-core score of 2,140 suggests strong per-thread efficiency, consistent with a modern design using a high-boost architecture.

PassMark results add further detail. The Ryzen AI 5 340 achieves 19,506 in PassMark multi-thread and 3,683 in PassMark single-thread. Its integer math score is 63,078, floating point math is 39,967, and extended instructions (SIMD) reach 16,440. Data compression scores 229,796, while data encryption hits 11,470. Random string sorting produces 24,970, and find prime numbers yields 72. Physics simulation scores 1,095.

The aggregate average benchmark score for the AMD part is 25,981. This places it at the 78th percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-14701TE with an average score of 26,013 and a performance delta of -0.1% relative to the AMD chip. That means the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 trails the Intel i7-14701TE by a negligible 0.1%. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 5655GE scores 25,880, which is 0.4% below the Ryzen AI 5 340. The AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS scores 26,106, putting it 0.5% ahead of the Ryzen AI 5 340. The Intel Core i7-11700K scores 25,812, which is 0.7% behind.

These deltas are all very small, within roughly one percentage point. The Ryzen AI 5 340 effectively trades blows with desktop and mobile parts from both AMD and Intel at this aggregate level. The largest gap is the 0.7% advantage over the Intel Core i7-11700K, and the largest deficit is the 0.5% shortfall against the AMD Ryzen 5 8640HS. This makes the Ryzen AI 5 340 a solid mid-pack performer, not a standout, but certainly not a laggard.

For the Intel Core 3 201TE, no benchmark entries exist in the database. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0, and its percentile is 50. The nearest rivals list is empty. Without measured scores, any head-to-head numeric comparison between the AMD and Intel parts is not possible from the recorded data. The only observable difference is that the AMD part has a rich set of benchmark results, while the Intel part has none.

Architecture Differences

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 uses the Zen 5 microarchitecture, with the codename Krackan Point. It belongs to the Ryzen AI 300 generation, which combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. The process node is 4 nm, fabricated by TSMC. The die size is 195 mm². The processor has 6 cores and 12 threads.

The Intel Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename, part of the Core 3 generation. Its microarchitecture is not listed in the database. The process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The die size is 163 mm². This Intel chip has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Cache configurations differ notably. The AMD part has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1 MB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of L3 cache. The Intel part also has 80 KB of L1 per core, but its L2 is 1.25 MB per core, and its L3 is 12 MB shared. The Intel chip therefore carries more total cache, particularly a larger shared L3 pool, which can help in workloads that reuse data across cores.

Memory support differs as well. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory, with a dual-channel memory bus and a bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5, also with a dual-channel bus, but its bandwidth is 76.8 GB/s. The AMD part has a higher theoretical memory bandwidth. The Intel part supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The AMD processor uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel processor uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The Intel part offers a newer PCIe generation, which can be relevant for storage or add-in card bandwidth.

Integrated graphics differ. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 includes a Radeon 840M iGPU. The Intel Core 3 201TE includes UHD Graphics 730. Neither part has a detailed graphics benchmark in the database, so no performance comparison can be made.

The market segment differs: the AMD part is listed as Mobile, while the Intel part is Desktop. The socket types also differ: AMD Socket FP8 for the Ryzen AI 5 340, and Intel Socket 1700 for the Core 3 201TE. The production status for both is Active. The AMD part released on January 5, 2025, and the Intel part on January 12, 2025, a seven-day gap.

Both parts have locked multipliers, so neither supports unlocked overclocking. The AMD part has a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Intel part has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 4.60 GHz. The Intel part starts at a higher base frequency but boosts to a lower maximum. TDP ratings differ: the AMD part is rated at 28 W, while the Intel part is rated at 45 W.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has 6 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the maximum boost clock for each?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 boosts up to 4.80 GHz. The Intel Core 3 201TE boosts up to 4.60 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Intel Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 does not.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has 8 MB of L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 3 201TE has 76.8 GB/s.

Q: Are there any benchmark scores for the Intel Core 3 201TE?

A: No. The database records no benchmark scores for the Intel Core 3 201TE, while the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has a complete set of Cinebench, Geekbench, and PassMark results.

Q: What PCIe generation does each processor use?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes. The Intel Core 3 201TE uses PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has a TDP of 28 W. The Intel Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 W.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 6 (AMD) vs 4 (Intel)
• Threads: 12 (AMD) vs 8 (Intel)
• Base clock: 2.00 GHz (AMD) vs 2.90 GHz (Intel)
• Boost clock: 4.80 GHz (AMD) vs 4.60 GHz (Intel)
• TDP: 28 W (AMD) vs 45 W (Intel)
• Socket: AMD Socket FP8 vs Intel Socket 1700
• Architecture: Zen 5 (AMD) vs not listed (Intel)
• Codename: Krackan Point (AMD) vs Bartlett Lake (Intel)
• Generation: Ryzen AI 300 (Zen 5 / Zen 5c) vs Core 3 (Bartlett Lake)
• Process node: 4 nm (AMD) vs 10 nm (Intel)
• Foundry: TSMC (AMD) vs Intel (Intel)
• Die size: 195 mm² (AMD) vs 163 mm² (Intel)
• L2 cache per core: 1 MB (AMD) vs 1.25 MB (Intel)
• L3 cache: 8 MB (AMD) vs 12 MB shared (Intel)
• Memory support: DDR5, LPDDR5X (AMD) vs DDR4, DDR5 (Intel)
• Memory bandwidth: 89.6 GB/s (AMD) vs 76.8 GB/s (Intel)
• ECC memory: false (AMD) vs true (Intel)
• PCIe: Gen 4, 16 lanes (AMD) vs Gen 5, 16 lanes (Intel)
• Integrated graphics: Radeon 840M (AMD) vs UHD Graphics 730 (Intel)
• Market segment: Mobile (AMD) vs Desktop (Intel)
• Release date: 2025-01-05 (AMD) vs 2025-01-12 (Intel)
• Launch MSRP: not available (AMD) vs $134 (Intel)
• Part number: 100-000001602 (AMD) vs SRPKDQ5CK (Intel)

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 wins in raw multi-core throughput based on its core and thread advantage. With 6 cores and 12 threads versus 4 cores and 8 threads, the AMD part has a 50% core count advantage and a 50% thread count advantage. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12,532 confirms strong scaling across all threads. For workloads that use many threads, such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or compilation, the AMD part is the clear choice from the available data.

The AMD part also wins on single-core boost frequency. Its 4.80 GHz boost clock exceeds the Intel part’s 4.60 GHz. Combined with its Geekbench single-core score of 2,140 and PassMark single-thread score of 3,683, the AMD part shows strong per-thread performance. This helps in lightly threaded applications like office productivity, web browsing, and some legacy software.

Memory bandwidth favors AMD. The 89.6 GB/s figure is higher than the Intel part’s 76.8 GB/s. This can benefit memory-intensive tasks such as large dataset manipulation or integrated graphics workloads that share system memory.

Power efficiency favors AMD. The 28 W TDP is substantially lower than the Intel part’s 45 W TDP. For mobile or small-form-factor systems where thermal headroom is limited, the AMD part uses less power while delivering more threads and a higher boost clock.

The Intel Core 3 201TE wins on a few specific fronts. It has a larger L3 cache at 12 MB versus 8 MB, which can improve hit rates in cache-sensitive workloads like certain database queries or scientific simulations. It also supports ECC memory, a critical feature for error-sensitive computing environments such as small servers or workstations where data integrity matters more than raw speed.

Intel also wins on PCIe generation. Its PCIe Gen 5 support with 16 lanes is newer than the AMD part’s PCIe Gen 4. This matters for users who plan to install a high-bandwidth PCIe Gen 5 NVMe SSD or other Gen 5 devices. The Intel part also supports DDR4 memory, which can be relevant for systems reusing existing DDR4 modules, though the AMD part adds LPDDR5X support for low-power memory designs.

The Intel part has a higher base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz. For sustained light loads that never trigger boost behavior, the Intel part may sustain a higher baseline frequency. However, the AMD part’s higher boost clock and greater thread count likely compensate in most real workloads.

The Intel part’s launch MSRP is $134. The AMD part has no launch MSRP listed, so no price comparison can be made.

The Verdict

The recorded data presents an asymmetric picture. The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 has a full suite of benchmarks and a clear performance profile. The Intel Core 3 201TE has no benchmark scores, no rivals, and an average score of zero. From a purely data-driven standpoint, the AMD processor is the only one with measurable performance evidence.

The AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 is the better choice for users who need multi-threaded performance, higher boost clocks, lower power consumption, and higher memory bandwidth. Its 6-core, 12-thread configuration, combined with a 4.80 GHz boost and 28 W TDP, makes it suitable for mobile systems where efficiency and responsiveness matter. Its 78th percentile ranking among all CPUs and its near-parity with the Intel Core i7-14701TE (within 0.1%) confirm it performs like a competent mid-range processor.

The Intel Core 3 201TE is the better choice only for specific use cases that its specifications support: ECC memory support, a larger 12 MB L3 cache, PCIe Gen 5 connectivity, and DDR4 compatibility. These features are relevant for reliability-focused desktop builds or cost-sensitive systems that already own DDR4 memory. The higher 45 W TDP suggests it is designed for desktop platforms with more cooling headroom.

For any user who requires measured performance, the AMD Ryzen AI 5 340 is the only option with data. For a user who specifically needs ECC memory or PCIe Gen 5 lanes and does not require strong multi-threaded throughput, the Intel Core 3 201TE offers those features, but its actual performance remains unquantified in the database. The decision rests on whether measured performance (AMD) or specific feature support (Intel) is the higher priority.