Intel Core 3 100HL vs Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a decisive performance advantage for the Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head tests, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus records the higher score with zero wins for the Intel Core 3 100HL. The most significant gaps appear in multi-core and compute-heavy workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 6656 against 1506 for the Core 3 100HL, a delta of -77.4% from the perspective of the smaller chip. The Cinebench R20 multicore test shows a similar pattern: 24461 versus 6278, a -74.3% difference. Cinebench R23 multicore narrows the gap slightly, with 44253 versus 14948, a -66.2% delta, but the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus still delivers roughly three times the multi-threaded rendering performance.

Single-core tests show a smaller but still clear gap. In Cinebench R15 singlecore, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 354 versus 212, a -40.1% delta. Cinebench R20 singlecore shows 3453 versus 886, a -74.3% delta, while Cinebench R23 singlecore shows 2439 versus 2110, a -13.5% delta. The PassMark single-thread test records 5068 for the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus and 3735 for the Core 3 100HL, a -26.3% difference. This indicates that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus holds a notable single-core advantage, though the margin is more moderate than in multi-core workloads.

Compute-intensive PassMark tests reinforce the pattern. Data compression scores 804322 versus 202225, a -74.9% delta. Data encryption shows 59097 versus 11964, a -79.8% delta. Extended instructions score 63506 versus 12463, a -80.4% delta. Prime number finding shows the largest relative gap: 615 versus 48, a -92.2% delta. Floating point math records 229491 versus 42108, a -81.7% delta. Integer math shows 175986 versus 56308, a -68% delta. Physics scores 4064 versus 928, a -77.2% delta. Random string sorting records 96945 versus 23223, a -76% delta. The multithread PassMark test shows 68574 versus 17586, a -74.4% delta.

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is consistently ahead by margins ranging from roughly 13.5% to over 90% depending on the workload. The smallest gap appears in Cinebench R23 singlecore, while the largest appears in prime number finding.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different design eras and use different manufacturing approaches. The Intel Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It has 8 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid layout with efficiency cores that do not add to the thread count. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus uses the Arrow Lake Refresh codename with the Arrow Lake generation, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. It has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning every core is a full performance core with no hyper-threading.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Core 3 100HL has 80 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 192 KB of L1 per core, 3 MB of L2 per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The larger L3 cache on the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is three times the size of the Core 3 100HL's L3, which contributes to its advantage in data-heavy workloads.

Memory support diverges as well. The Core 3 100HL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory with dual-channel access. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports only DDR5, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also supports ECC memory, while the Core 3 100HL does not. PCIe capabilities differ: the Core 3 100HL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics are present on both, with the Core 3 100HL using Iris Xe Graphics 48EU and the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus using Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU.

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus includes a documented transistor count of 17,800 million and a die size of 243 mm², while the Core 3 100HL has no recorded transistor or die size data. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has an unlocked multiplier, while the Core 3 100HL is locked. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus carries the part number SA4V6; the Core 3 100HL has an unknown part number.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 100HL has 8 cores and 12 threads.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap?

A: In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus scores 2439 versus 2110 for the Core 3 100HL, a -13.5% delta. PassMark single-thread shows 5068 versus 3735, a -26.3% delta.

Q: Which processor supports ECC memory?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports ECC memory. The Intel Core 3 100HL does not.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus has a recorded memory bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. The Core 3 100HL has no recorded memory bandwidth figure, but it supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus supports only DDR5.

Q: Which processor uses a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Core 3 100HL is built on a 10 nm process at Intel.

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

A: No. Across all 17 recorded head-to-head benchmark tests, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus records the higher score. The Core 3 100HL has zero wins.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 100HL | Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus |

|----------------|--------------------|-----------------------------|

| Cores | 8 | 24 |

| Threads | 12 | 24 |

| Base clock | 2.10 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.60 GHz | 5.50 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 125 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Arrow Lake Refresh |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17,800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 192 KB (per core) |

| L2 cache | 2 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 12 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 115.2 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 5, 20 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 48EU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | Yes |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2026-03-10 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $299 |

| Part number | unknown | SA4V6 |

The Verdict

The recorded benchmark data shows a clear hierarchy. The Intel Core Ultra 7 270K Plus sits in the 96th percentile of all CPUs, with an average benchmark score of 93785. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon 6520P with a delta of 0%, the AMD EPYC 4564P at -1.5%, the AMD EPYC 9175F at -1.9%, and the AMD EPYC 4565P at -2.1%. This places it firmly in server-class territory for average throughput. The Intel Core 3 100HL sits in the 76th percentile, with an average benchmark score of 23545. Its nearest rivals are the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U at -0.7%, the Intel Core i5-11500 at -0.7%, the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V at 1.1%, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H at 1.2%. The Core 3 100HL competes with mainstream mid-range parts, not with high-end desktop or workstation silicon.

The data indicates that the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the superior processor for essentially every measured workload. Its smallest advantage is a 13.5% lead in Cinebench R23 singlecore, and its largest is a 92.2% lead in prime number finding. The Core 3 100HL offers no benchmark win to counterbalance this. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus also provides a larger cache, higher clocks, more PCIe lanes, a newer process node, and ECC support. The only areas where the Core 3 100HL might be considered are its lower TDP of 45 W versus 125 W, its support for older DDR4 memory, and its earlier release date. For any workload that benefits from multi-threading, high clock speeds, or large caches, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the clear choice based on the recorded measurements.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus wins in every recorded benchmark. For multi-threaded rendering, Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 all show margins between 66.2% and 77.4% in its favor. For data compression and encryption, it leads by 74.9% and 79.8%, respectively. For floating point and integer math, it leads by 81.7% and 68%. For physics simulation, it leads by 77.2%. For single-thread tasks, it leads by 13.5% to 40.1% depending on the test. The Core Ultra 7 270K Plus is the appropriate choice for compute-heavy desktop workloads, content creation, software compilation, data processing, and any task where the 24 cores and 36 MB of L3 cache can be utilized.

The Core 3 100HL has no benchmark wins, so any advantage it offers is outside the measured data. Its 45 W TDP suggests it is suited for power-constrained builds, and its support for DDR4 means it can be paired with older memory modules. The Intel Socket 1700 compatibility places it in a different motherboard ecosystem than the Socket 1851 of the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus. For users with an existing LGA1700 platform who need an 8-core, 12-thread processor with integrated Iris Xe Graphics and modest power draw, the Core 3 100HL fits that role. For users building a new system or upgrading to a platform with PCIe Gen 5 support, DDR5-only memory, and a 24-core processor with an unlocked multiplier, the Core Ultra 7 270K Plus delivers substantially more performance across every recorded metric. The average benchmark score gap of 93785 versus 23545, roughly a 4x difference, reflects the scale of the performance separation between these two parts.