Intel Core 3 100HL vs Intel Core Ultra 5 338H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a decisive overall victory for the Intel Core Ultra 5 338H, which wins 16 of the 17 recorded comparisons. The Core 3 100HL manages a single win. The margin of victory varies considerably across workloads, revealing distinct performance characteristics for each processor.

The most dramatic gaps appear in multi-threaded and specialized compute tasks. In PassMark physics, the Ultra 5 338H scores 2697 against 928 for the Core 3 100HL, a 65.6% advantage. PassMark floating point math shows a 49.9% lead for the Ultra 5 338H (84067 versus 42108), and extended instructions favor the newer chip by 47.9% (23906 versus 12463). Data encryption also shows a wide split: 21367 versus 11964, a 44% difference.

Cinebench results paint a similar picture. The R15 multicore test gives the Ultra 5 338H a 2504 score versus 1506, a 39.9% lead. R20 multicore shows a 38.5% gap (10213 versus 6278), while R23 multicore narrows to 8.5% (16331 versus 14948). The single-core R15 and R20 results also favor the Ultra 5 338H by 30.5% and 38.5% respectively.

The Core 3 100HL wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test by a slim margin. Its score of 2110 beats the Ultra 5 338H's 2044, a 3.2% edge. This is the only recorded benchmark where the older architecture comes out ahead.

PassMark integer math shows a closer contest: 64934 versus 56308, a 13.3% advantage for the Ultra 5 338H. Single-thread PassMark scores favor the Ultra 5 338H by 10.6% (4180 versus 3735). Data compression shows a 26.9% gap (276539 versus 202225), random string sorting a 31.9% gap (34082 versus 23223), and the find prime numbers test a massive 84.2% difference (304 versus 48).

The average benchmark score for the Ultra 5 338H sits at 33989, placing it in the 84th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The Core 3 100HL averages 23545, which lands in the 76th percentile. That 10444-point difference in average score translates to a substantial overall performance tier separation.

The nearest rivals for each processor confirm their respective positions. The Core 3 100HL sits within 1.2% of the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H and within 1.1% of the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U and Intel Core i5-11500 by 0.7%. The Ultra 5 338H trades places with the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H (0.3% behind), the Intel Core i7-12800HX (0.3% ahead), the Intel Xeon 6353P (0.4% ahead), and the AMD EPYC 4244P (0.7% behind). These close margins indicate both processors perform competitively within their respective tiers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 338H has an average benchmark score of 33989, while the Intel Core 3 100HL scores 23545 on average.

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 100HL win any benchmark at all?

A: Yes, it wins the Cinebench R23 single-core test with a score of 2110, which is 3.2% higher than the Ultra 5 338H's 2044.

Q: How large is the performance gap in the most lopsided test?

A: The PassMark find prime numbers test shows the largest gap: the Ultra 5 338H scores 304 versus 48 for the Core 3 100HL, an 84.2% difference.

Q: What are the percentile rankings for each processor?

A: The Core 3 100HL sits in the 76th percentile of all CPUs, while the Ultra 5 338H ranks in the 84th percentile.

Q: Which processor has a higher core count and how does that affect results?

A: The Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores versus 8 for the Core 3 100HL, and both have 12 threads. The multicore Cinebench results show the Ultra 5 338H ahead by 39.9% in R15, 38.5% in R20, and 8.5% in R23.

Q: How does the Ultra 5 338H compare to its nearest rival in the database?

A: The Ultra 5 338H trails the Intel Core Ultra 7 165H by 0.3%, leads the Intel Core i7-12800HX by 0.3%, leads the Intel Xeon 6353P by 0.4%, and trails the AMD EPYC 4244P by 0.7%.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural generations and target different market segments. The Core 3 100HL uses Raptor Lake architecture under the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process. The Ultra 5 338H uses Panther Lake architecture under the Panther Lake codename, fabricated on a 3 nm process. Both processors come from Intel's foundry.

The core configurations differ significantly. The Core 3 100HL has 8 cores and 12 threads, while the Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores and 12 threads. This means the Core 3 100HL relies on hyper-threading to reach its thread count, while the Ultra 5 338H achieves 12 threads from 12 physical cores without that dependency.

Cache hierarchies diverge as well. The Core 3 100HL carries 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 5 338H features 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, and 18 MB of shared L3. The larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations on the Ultra 5 338H contribute to its single-thread performance edge in most tests.

Memory support differs by platform. The Core 3 100HL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration, while the Ultra 5 338H uses LPDDR5X with a recorded memory bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. PCIe capabilities also differ: the Core 3 100HL provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, while the Ultra 5 338H provides Gen 5 with 4 CPU lanes.

Integrated graphics present another distinction. The Core 3 100HL includes Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units, while the Ultra 5 338H includes Arc B370 graphics. The socket types reflect their different segments: the Core 3 100HL uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540.

The Core 3 100HL targets the desktop market with a 45 W TDP, while the Ultra 5 338H targets mobile systems with a 25 W TDP. The release dates place the Core 3 100HL in April 2024 and the Ultra 5 338H in January 2026. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, and neither supports ECC memory.

The Verdict

The recorded data indicates the Ultra 5 338H is the stronger processor across nearly every measured workload. Its 16 benchmark wins, higher average score, and higher percentile ranking make the performance hierarchy clear. The only exception is the Cinebench R23 single-core test, where the Core 3 100HL leads by 3.2%.

The performance difference is most pronounced in workloads that scale with core count and modern instruction efficiency. Physics simulation, floating point math, extended instructions, and data encryption all show the Ultra 5 338H leading by margins between 44% and 65.6%. The find prime numbers test demonstrates the largest gap at 84.2%.

The Core 3 100HL remains competitive in specific single-threaded scenarios, as shown by its R23 single-core win. Its average score of 23545 places it near the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U and Intel Core i5-11500, both within 0.7%. The Ultra 5 338H, by contrast, trades results with the Core Ultra 7 165H and Core i7-12800HX, all within 0.3%.

For users prioritizing power efficiency, the Ultra 5 338H delivers superior performance at a 25 W TDP compared to the Core 3 100HL's 45 W TDP. The desktop-oriented Core 3 100HL uses a replaceable Socket 1700, while the mobile Ultra 5 338H uses BGA 2540.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across several key specification fields. The Core 3 100HL has 8 cores, while the Ultra 5 338H has 12 cores. Both list 12 threads. Base clocks differ slightly: 2.10 GHz for the Core 3 100HL versus 1.90 GHz for the Ultra 5 338H. Boost clocks run 4.60 GHz and 4.70 GHz respectively.

TDP ratings show a notable gap: 45 W for the Core 3 100HL and 25 W for the Ultra 5 338H. The Core 3 100HL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Ultra 5 338H uses Intel BGA 2540. The Core 3 100HL is built on a 10 nm process, the Ultra 5 338H on a 3 nm process.

Cache structures differ in every tier: L1 is 80 KB per core versus 192 KB per core, L2 is 2 MB per core versus 2.5 MB per core, and L3 is 12 MB shared versus 18 MB shared. Memory support shows DDR4 and DDR5 for the Core 3 100HL, while the Ultra 5 338H supports LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 136.5 GB/s. PCIe configuration lists Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the Core 3 100HL and Gen 5 with 4 lanes for the Ultra 5 338H.

Integrated graphics differ as well: Iris Xe Graphics 48EU on the Core 3 100HL versus Arc B370 on the Ultra 5 338H. The market segment column lists Desktop for the Core 3 100HL and Mobile for the Ultra 5 338H. The Core 3 100HL uses Raptor Lake architecture, and the Ultra 5 338H uses Panther Lake. Release dates are April 2024 and January 2026 respectively. The part number for the Ultra 5 338H is recorded as SA4REQ9EW, while the Core 3 100HL lists unknown.

Where Each One Wins

The Ultra 5 338H wins in every multicore-heavy workload recorded. Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests all favor it, with leads from 8.5% to 39.9%. PassMark multithread shows a 38.8% advantage. Data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, floating point math, integer math, physics, random string sorting, and find prime numbers all go to the Ultra 5 338H.

The Ultra 5 338H also dominates single-thread tests in most cases. Cinebench R15 single-core shows a 30.5% lead, R20 single-core a 38.5% lead, and PassMark single-thread a 10.6% lead. The Core 3 100HL wins only the Cinebench R23 single-core test with its 3.2% margin.

The Core 3 100HL's desktop Socket 1700 makes it a candidate for systems where socketed processors are required. Its support for DDR4 and DDR5 memory offers flexibility in platform memory selection. The Ultra 5 338H's mobile BGA 2540 package suits integrated laptop designs, and its LPDDR5X support with 136.5 GB/s bandwidth serves bandwidth-sensitive mobile workloads.

The Core 3 100HL's single benchmark win suggests it retains a narrow edge in at least one single-threaded rendering workload. For all other recorded tasks, the Ultra 5 338H delivers meaningfully higher scores, often by wide margins. The 84th versus 76th percentile ranking summarizes the overall separation between these two processors in the database.