AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 vs Intel Core 3 100HL Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data splits this pairing into two distinct performance profiles. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 wins 12 of the 15 recorded head-to-head tests, but the Intel Core 3 100HL takes the two most demanding multi-threaded workloads and one encryption test. The margin of victory matters more than the raw win count.

The single most lopsided result is in PassMark's extended instructions suite. The AMD part scores 17003 against Intel's 12463, a 36.4% advantage. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison and points to a substantial difference in how each processor handles specialized instruction workloads. The Ryzen AI 7 345 also dominates prime number finding, scoring 62 versus 48, a 29.2% lead. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a similar gap: AMD scores 271 against Intel's 212, a 27.8% margin. These three tests establish that the AMD chip has a clear efficiency-per-clock advantage in scalar and instruction-heavy tasks.

The Intel Core 3 100HL strikes back in Cinebench R23. Its multicore score of 14948 eclipses AMD's 11461, a 23.3% deficit for the Ryzen part. The single-core R23 result also favors Intel, 2110 versus 1818, a 13.8% lead. These are the only two Cinebench tests where Intel wins, and they are significant because R23 is a widely cited rendering benchmark. The R15 multicore test tells a different story: AMD wins 1712 to 1506, a 13.7% margin. The two Cinebench generations disagree on which chip renders faster in multi-threaded workloads, which suggests the performance relationship depends heavily on workload scaling and instruction mix.

PassMark results generally favor AMD. Data compression shows a 17.4% lead (237484 versus 202225). Integer math delivers a 12.7% advantage (63475 versus 56308). Multithreaded PassMark scoring gives AMD 19927 against 17586, a 13.3% lead. Physics simulation follows with a 17.3% edge (1089 versus 928). Random string sorting adds a 9.5% win (25435 versus 23223). Floating point math is close, with AMD ahead by just 1.2% (42621 versus 42108). Single-thread PassMark results show a narrower 3.7% gap (3875 versus 3735). The only PassMark category Intel wins is data encryption, where it scores 11964 against AMD's 11814, a slim 1.3% margin.

The average benchmark score reflects this overall split. The Ryzen AI 7 345 averages 29461, while the Core 3 100HL averages 23545. That difference places the AMD part at the 81st percentile of all CPUs in the database, compared to the 76th percentile for Intel. The nearest rivals for AMD include the AMD Ryzen 7 3800X at 29447 (0% delta) and the Intel Core i5-13500HX at 29270 (0.7% delta). The Intel part's closest competitors are the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U at 23709 (0.7% above Intel) and the Intel Core i5-11500 at 23718 (0.7% above). These reference points show that the Ryzen AI 7 345 competes in a higher performance class than the Core 3 100HL despite the Intel chip's higher core count.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 is the stronger overall processor in this matchup. It wins 12 of 15 head-to-head tests, holds a 20.1% average benchmark score advantage (29461 versus 23545), and ranks five percentile points higher across all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 100HL cannot overcome the breadth of AMD's wins, even though it posts a decisive Cinebench R23 multicore victory.

The Intel chip's case rests primarily on that R23 multicore result and its R23 single-core score. For rendering workloads that mirror R23's scaling behavior, the Core 3 100HL delivers 23.3% more multicore performance and 13.8% more single-core performance than the Ryzen part. That is a genuine strength, not an outlier artifact. However, the R15 multicore test contradicts that outcome, giving AMD a 13.7% win. The two Cinebench versions use different scene complexities and thread scheduling, so the R23 result should not be treated as universal proof of Intel superiority in all multi-threaded tasks.

The AMD chip demonstrates broader competence. Its data compression, integer math, extended instructions, and physics wins span a wider range of workload types. The 36.4% lead in extended instructions is particularly telling, as it suggests the Zen 5 / Zen 5c hybrid architecture executes specialized code paths with far greater efficiency. The Ryzen AI 7 345 also holds a 3.7% single-thread PassMark advantage, which matters for everyday responsiveness.

A neutral reading of the database shows no overall winner by a knockout. The AMD part wins the majority of tests and the overall average score. The Intel part wins the most demanding rendering benchmark. Any selection between these two should be driven by workload priority, not by a blanket performance label.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 wins in data compression, integer math, floating point math, multithreaded PassMark scoring, physics simulation, random string sorting, single-thread PassMark, extended instructions, prime number finding, Cinebench R15 multicore, and Cinebench R15 single-core. That list covers productivity tasks, general computation, simulation, and legacy rendering benchmarks. The extended instructions lead of 36.4% makes the AMD part the clear choice for workloads that use specialized instruction sets. The 17.4% compression win favors archiving and database workloads. The 17.3% physics lead suggests better performance in simulation and physics-heavy applications.

The Intel Core 3 100HL wins in Cinebench R23 multicore, Cinebench R23 single-core, and data encryption. The R23 multicore margin of 23.3% is the largest single win for either chip in any multi-threaded benchmark. For users running modern rendering pipelines that scale like R23, the Intel part offers a substantial advantage. The 1.3% encryption win is narrow but consistent, giving Intel an edge in encryption-heavy tasks. The R23 single-core win of 13.8% indicates that Intel's Raptor Lake architecture still holds a clock-for-clock advantage in certain lightly threaded rendering scenarios.

The core count difference explains part of this split. Intel fields 8 cores and 12 threads, while AMD fields 6 cores and 12 threads. Both chips have 12 threads, but Intel distributes them across more physical cores. That configuration helps Intel in R23 multicore, where additional physical cores can improve scheduling and cache utilization. AMD's 6 cores with 12 threads rely on simultaneous multithreading to match thread counts, and the benchmark results show that approach works better in PassMark's workloads than in R23.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 averages 29461, compared to 23545 for the Intel Core 3 100HL.

Q: How many head-to-head tests does each processor win?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 wins 12 tests. The Intel Core 3 100HL wins 3 tests.

Q: What is the largest single benchmark margin in this comparison?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 leads by 36.4% in PassMark extended instructions, scoring 17003 versus 12463.

Q: Does the Intel chip win any multi-threaded benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 3 100HL wins Cinebench R23 multicore with a score of 14948 against 11461, a 23.3% lead. It loses Cinebench R15 multicore, where AMD scores 1712 versus 1506.

Q: How do the two processors compare in single-thread performance?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 leads PassMark single-thread by 3.7% (3875 versus 3735). The Intel Core 3 100HL leads Cinebench R23 single-core by 13.8% (2110 versus 1818). The AMD part leads Cinebench R15 single-core by 27.8% (271 versus 212).

Q: What percentile rank does each processor hold in the database?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 345 sits at the 81st percentile of all CPUs. The Intel Core 3 100HL sits at the 76th percentile.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural lineages. AMD uses the Krackan Point codename under the Ryzen AI 300 generation, built on a hybrid Zen 5 / Zen 5c design. Intel uses the Raptor Lake-PS codename under the Core 3 generation, based on Raptor Lake architecture. These are not competing designs from the same generation; they represent different approaches to core topology and process technology.

Manufacturing processes differ sharply. AMD fabricates the Ryzen AI 7 345 on a 4 nm process at TSMC. Intel builds the Core 3 100HL on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The smaller process node gives AMD a density and efficiency advantage that shows up in the power envelope: AMD's TDP is 28 watts, while Intel's is 45 watts. The benchmark results, particularly the 36.4% extended instructions lead, are consistent with the architectural and process differences.

Core and thread configurations differ in physical layout. AMD provides 6 cores and 12 threads. Intel provides 8 cores and 12 threads. Both support 12 threads, but Intel spreads them across two more physical cores. L2 cache also differs: AMD allocates 1 MB per core, while Intel allocates 2 MB per core. L3 cache shows a larger gap, with AMD offering 4 MB total and Intel offering 12 MB shared. The larger Intel L3 cache likely contributes to its R23 multicore win. L1 cache is identical at 80 KB per core.

Clock speeds are similar on paper. AMD's base clock is 2.00 GHz with a boost of 4.60 GHz. Intel's base clock is 2.10 GHz with a boost of 4.60 GHz. The boost clocks match, but the base clocks differ by 0.10 GHz. The measured performance differences therefore come from architecture, cache, and process efficiency rather than raw clock speed.

Memory support diverges. AMD supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with dual-channel access and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel access, but the database lists no bandwidth figure for Intel. AMD also provides more PCIe lanes: 14 CPU-only lanes at Gen 4, versus 8 CPU-only lanes at Gen 4 for Intel.

Integrated graphics differ as well. AMD uses the Radeon 840M, while Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. Socket compatibility separates the two completely: AMD fits Socket FP8, while Intel fits Socket 1700. The AMD part targets the mobile market segment, while the Intel part targets the desktop segment. Release dates also differ, with Intel launching on April 7, 2024, and AMD following on January 14, 2025. Both processors remain in active production, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.