Intel Core 3 100HL vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 3 100HL has complete benchmark data recorded in the database, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 has no benchmark entries. This means a direct score-by-score comparison is impossible; the database shows zero recorded results for the Snapdragon across all test suites. The Intel part, by contrast, has 17 recorded scores spanning Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, plus the Passmark suite.

The Intel Core 3 100HL posts a multicore Cinebench R23 score of 14948 and a single-core score of 2110. In Cinebench R20, it records 6278 multicore and 886 single-core. The R15 run shows 1506 multicore and 212 single-core. These numbers place the Intel part at the 76th percentile among all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 23545.

The Snapdragon X1P-66-100 sits at the 50th percentile, but that figure is derived from its overall classification, not from measured results. Its average benchmark score is recorded as 0. The nearest rival data for the Intel part shows it trading blows with a tight cluster of competitors: the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U scores 23709, which is 0.7% higher than the Intel average; the Intel Core i5-11500 scores 23718, also 0.7% higher; the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V scores 23297, which is 1.1% lower; and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H scores 23277, 1.2% lower. The Intel Core 3 100HL thus sits within a 2% band around four established mid-range parts, with a slight edge over two of them and a slight deficit against two others.

Since the Snapdragon has no measured scores, no head-to-head win margin can be quantified. The database records zero wins for each side in the headToHeadBenchmarks field. What the data does show is that the Intel part is a measured, active competitor in the desktop segment, while the Qualcomm part is an active mobile part with a known specification sheet but no validated performance results in this database.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 100HL compare to its nearest rivals in average score?

A: The Intel part averages 23545. The AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U scores 23709, 0.7% higher. The Intel Core i5-11500 scores 23718, 0.7% higher. The Intel Core Ultra 7 266V scores 23297, 1.1% lower. The AMD Ryzen 7 5800H scores 23277, 1.2% lower.

Q: What benchmark results exist for the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100?

A: The database contains no benchmark scores for the Snapdragon. Its average benchmark score is 0, its wins count is 0, and it has no nearest rivals listed. The only recorded data points are its specifications and a 50th percentile classification.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 3 100HL boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 boosts to 4.00 GHz. The Intel part also has a lower base clock at 2.10 GHz versus the Snapdragon's 3.40 GHz.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 100HL has 8 cores and 12 threads. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Snapdragon has two more physical cores but two fewer threads overall.

Q: What is the process node difference between the two?

A: The Intel part uses a 10 nm process from Intel's own foundry. The Qualcomm part uses a 4 nm process from TSMC. The Snapdragon's node is significantly smaller, which typically relates to power efficiency, though no efficiency benchmarks are recorded for it.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 3 100HL has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel part doubles the Snapdragon in this specific cache level, though the Snapdragon's L2 cache is larger at 12 MB per module versus Intel's 2 MB per core.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. It is part of the Core 3 generation under the Raptor Lake-PS family. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 uses the Oryon codename under the Snapdragon X (Plus) generation, built on TSMC's 4 nm process. The foundry and process technology differ entirely: Intel fabricates its own silicon, while Qualcomm outsources to TSMC.

The cache hierarchies are structured differently. The Intel part has an 80 KB L1 cache per core, a 2 MB L2 cache per core, and a 12 MB shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part has a 288 KB L1 cache per core, a 12 MB L2 cache per module, and a 6 MB shared L3 cache. The per-core L1 is 3.6 times larger on the Snapdragon, and the L2 is organized per module rather than per core, with a 12 MB allocation per module. The Intel part compensates with double the shared L3.

Memory support diverges sharply. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. Qualcomm supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but with a recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s. The Intel part has no recorded memory bandwidth figure. The Snapdragon's memory bus is tailored for mobile power envelopes, while the Intel part's dual-protocol support targets desktop flexibility.

PCIe connectivity differs in lane count. The Intel part provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Qualcomm part provides Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The integrated graphics also differ: Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units, while Qualcomm uses the Adreno X1-85. The market segments further separate them: Intel is classified as Desktop, Qualcomm as Mobile. The Intel part launches on Intel Socket 1700, the Qualcomm on Qualcomm BGA 2073.

Specification Differences

The core counts differ: 8 cores for Intel versus 10 for Qualcomm. Thread counts differ: 12 for Intel versus 10 for Qualcomm. Base clocks differ: 2.10 GHz for Intel versus 3.40 GHz for Qualcomm. Boost clocks differ: 4.60 GHz for Intel versus 4.00 GHz for Qualcomm. The thermal design power differs: 45 W for Intel versus 35 W for Qualcomm.

The sockets are different: Intel Socket 1700 versus Qualcomm BGA 2073. The process nodes differ: 10 nm for Intel versus 4 nm for Qualcomm. The foundries differ: Intel for the Core 3, TSMC for the Snapdragon. The L1 cache differs: 80 KB per core for Intel versus 288 KB per core for Qualcomm. The L2 cache differs: 2 MB per core for Intel versus 12 MB per module for Qualcomm. The L3 cache differs: 12 MB shared for Intel versus 6 MB shared for Qualcomm.

Memory support differs: DDR4 and DDR5 for Intel versus LPDDR5X for Qualcomm. The memory bandwidth is recorded only for Qualcomm at 135.2 GB/s; Intel has no recorded value. PCIe lanes differ: 8 lanes for Intel versus 12 lanes for Qualcomm, both Gen 4. Integrated graphics differ: Iris Xe Graphics 48EU for Intel versus Adreno X1-85 for Qualcomm. The market segment differs: Desktop for Intel versus Mobile for Qualcomm. The release dates are close, with Intel on 2024-04-07 and Qualcomm on 2024-04-23. The part numbers differ, with Qualcomm listing X1P66100 and Intel listing unknown.

The Verdict

The recorded data supports only one verdict for measured performance: the Intel Core 3 100HL is the only part of the two with validated benchmark results. It delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 14948, a single-core score of 2110, and an average benchmark score of 23545, placing it at the 76th percentile. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 has no measured scores, an average benchmark score of 0, and a 50th percentile classification that is not backed by any recorded test.

For buyers who rely on benchmark data, the Intel part is the only one with evidence of performance in this database. It sits within 1.2% of four established mid-range rivals, beating the Intel Core Ultra 7 266V by 1.1% and the AMD Ryzen 7 5800H by 1.2%, while trailing the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U and Intel Core i5-11500 by 0.7% each. The Snapdragon cannot be positioned against these numbers because no numbers exist.

The Snapdragon's specification sheet shows a newer process node at 4 nm, a higher base clock at 3.40 GHz, more cores at 10, a larger L1 and L2 cache, a higher recorded memory bandwidth at 135.2 GB/s, and a lower TDP at 35 W. These are architectural advantages on paper, but the database records no benchmark to confirm what they deliver in practice. The Intel part counters with a higher boost clock at 4.60 GHz, double the L3 cache, broader memory support including DDR4 and DDR5, and a complete set of measured scores.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 100HL wins in every category where the database has recorded measurements. It has a full benchmark suite across Cinebench R15, R20, R23 and Passmark, including single-thread, multithread, physics, floating point math, integer math, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, prime number finding, and random string sorting. Its percentile ranking of 76 reflects an active competitive position against all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rival cluster shows it within 1.2% of four parts, meaning it can trade positions with the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 8540U, Intel Core i5-11500, Intel Core Ultra 7 266V, and AMD Ryzen 7 5800H depending on the workload.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-66-100 wins only in the specification categories. It offers more physical cores at 10, a higher base clock at 3.40 GHz, a smaller process node at 4 nm, a larger L1 cache at 288 KB per core, a larger L2 cache at 12 MB per module, a higher recorded memory bandwidth at 135.2 GB/s, more PCIe lanes at 12, and a lower TDP at 35 W. These are meaningful distinctions for system designers evaluating power envelopes and memory throughput on paper. The Snapdragon also targets the mobile segment, where its LPDDR5X support and lower TDP align with portable system requirements.

The Intel part wins in boost clock at 4.60 GHz, L3 cache at 12 MB, memory flexibility with both DDR4 and DDR5 support, desktop market positioning, and all recorded performance metrics. The Snapdragon wins in process technology, core count, base clock, cache capacity at the L1 and L2 levels, memory bandwidth, PCIe lane count, and power efficiency as expressed by TDP. The database cannot assign a performance win to the Snapdragon because no benchmark results are recorded for it.