AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 vs Intel Core 3 201E Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data presents a decisive hierarchy between these two processors. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 wins every single head-to-head benchmark recorded in the database, delivering a clean sweep with 15 wins and zero losses. The average benchmark score of 34222 for the AMD part places it at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, while the Intel Core 3 201E averages 19056, sitting at the 73rd percentile. This is not a close contest; it is a fundamental gap in performance class.

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 belongs in a performance tier that rivals desktop processors like the AMD EPYC 4244P and the Intel Core i5-13450HX, both of which sit within 0.3% of its average score. The Intel Core 3 201E, by contrast, matches the level of the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS and the Intel Core i5-12400F, with all three within 0.4% of each other. The data indicates that a user choosing the AMD part gets a processor that competes with much larger desktop chips, while the Intel part competes in a lower performance band.

Given the complete victory of the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 across all 15 benchmark tests, the choice is straightforward for anyone prioritizing raw compute performance. The Intel Core 3 201E, with its launch MSRP of $134, does offer a distinct platform characteristic: it supports ECC memory and uses the Intel Socket 1700 with PCIe Gen 5. However, the performance data does not support selecting it for any compute-heavy workload. The AMD part also carries a 28 W TDP versus 60 W for the Intel part, meaning the AMD chip delivers its superior results with a lower thermal design power.

Where Each One Wins

The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 wins in every measured category. The largest deltas appear in multi-threaded and data-intensive workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the AMD part scores 2477 against 1271, a 94.9% advantage. PassMark integer math shows a 95.1% lead (85651 versus 43894), and extended instructions show a 96.4% lead (21678 versus 11035). These are not marginal improvements; they represent nearly double the throughput in several tests.

The Intel Core 3 201E does not register a single win in the head-to-head data. Its closest relative performance comes in Cinebench R23 single-core, where it scores 1780 against 1958, a 10% deficit. In PassMark single-thread, the gap narrows to 10.1% (3482 versus 3834). These single-thread results are the only areas where the Intel part approaches parity, yet it still loses.

For users running heavily threaded applications, video encoding, compilation, or data processing, the AMD part delivers roughly 27% to 95% more performance depending on the specific workload. For users with lightly threaded tasks, the AMD part still maintains a 10% edge, so there is no workload category where the Intel part offers a performance advantage based on the recorded measurements.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies and manufacturing processes. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 uses the Zen 5 architecture on TSMC's 4 nm process node, with the Krackan Point codename and the Ryzen AI 300 generation designation that combines Zen 5 and Zen 5c cores. It integrates 8 cores and 16 threads, with a base clock of 2.00 GHz and a boost clock of 5.00 GHz. The die size measures 195 mm².

The Intel Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename on Intel's 10 nm process node, with 4 cores and 8 threads. Its base clock is higher at 3.60 GHz, but the boost clock is slightly lower at 4.80 GHz. The die size is 163 mm². The Intel part uses a shared 12 MB L3 cache, while the AMD part has 8 MB of L3 cache. For L2 cache, the Intel part has 1.25 MB per core versus 1 MB per core on the AMD part. Both have 80 KB of L1 cache per core.

Memory support differs substantially. The AMD part supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus but a lower memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not. PCIe connectivity also differs: the AMD part uses Gen 4 with 16 lanes, while the Intel part uses Gen 5 with 16 lanes.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The AMD part uses the Radeon 860M, while the Intel part uses UHD Graphics 730. The AMD part targets the mobile market segment with an AMD Socket FP8, while the Intel part targets the desktop segment with Intel Socket 1700. The TDP ratings reflect this: 28 W for the AMD mobile chip versus 60 W for the Intel desktop chip.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 has an average benchmark score of 34222, while the Intel Core 3 201E averages 19056. The AMD part also sits at the 84th percentile of all CPUs, compared to the 73rd percentile for the Intel part.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 201E win any benchmark tests?

A: No. The head-to-head data records 15 wins for the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 and zero wins for the Intel Core 3 201E across all tested benchmarks.

Q: How large is the multi-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 16014.5 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core 3 201E scores 12613. This gives the AMD part a 27% advantage.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X with a memory bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s. The Intel Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Intel part supports ECC memory, while the AMD part does not.

Q: Which processor has higher clock speeds?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E has a higher base clock at 3.60 GHz versus 2.00 GHz for the AMD part. However, the AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus 4.80 GHz for the Intel part.

Q: How do the nearest rivals compare for each processor?

A: The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350's nearest rivals are the AMD EPYC 4244P (0% delta), AMD Ryzen 7 3700X (-0.1%), Intel Core i5-13450HX (-0.3%), and Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (0.4%). The Intel Core 3 201E's nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 7535HS (0%), Intel Core i5-12400F (0.1%), Intel Core i5-1335U (0.4%), and AMD EPYC 7773X (0.4%).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multi-core test shows the largest performance gap in the entire dataset. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 scores 2477 against 1271 for the Intel Core 3 201E, a 94.9% advantage. This nearly doubles the throughput in a classic rendering workload. The single-core version of the same test shows a 64.2% lead for the AMD part (294 versus 179), a substantial gap that indicates the AMD architecture delivers far better per-core performance despite the lower base clock.

The Cinebench R23 tests show a narrower but still decisive gap. Multi-core results give the AMD part 16014.5 versus 12613, a 27% lead. Single-core results give 1958 versus 1780, a 10% lead. These results suggest that the AMD part scales better with additional cores while also maintaining a per-core advantage.

PassMark integer math reveals one of the largest deltas: 85651 for the AMD part versus 43894 for the Intel part, a 95.1% difference. Similarly, extended instructions show a 96.4% gap (21678 versus 11035). Data compression shows an 85.2% lead (304089 versus 164160), and random string sorting shows an 87.1% lead (33266 versus 17783). Data encryption shows a 70.7% lead (15244 versus 8931).

Floating point math gives the AMD part 53230 versus 33260, a 60% advantage. The PassMark multi-thread test shows 24935 versus 14839, a 68% lead. Physics simulation shows a smaller gap: 1349 versus 1141, an 18.2% lead. Prime number finding shows a 40.4% lead (80 versus 57).

The single-thread PassMark results show the smallest gap in the dataset: 3834 versus 3482, a 10.1% lead for the AMD part. This confirms that even in the workload category most favorable to the Intel part's higher base clock, the AMD Zen 5 architecture maintains a measurable advantage.

The overall pattern is consistent. The AMD Ryzen AI 7 350 outperforms the Intel Core 3 201E in every recorded benchmark, with leads ranging from 10% to 96.4%. The AMD part also achieves these results at 28 W TDP versus 60 W for the Intel part. The Intel part's advantages are limited to platform features: ECC memory support, PCIe Gen 5, and DDR4 compatibility. None of those features translate into benchmark wins.