Intel Core 3 100U vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits cleanly along workload type. The Intel Core 5 315 wins 16 of 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons, while the Intel Core 3 100U manages only a single victory. That lone win is in PassMark integer math, where the Core 3 100U scores 39580 against 31690 for the Core 5 315, a 24.9% advantage. This suggests the older Raptor Lake design retains an edge in workloads that depend on integer execution throughput, likely a consequence of its higher thread count.

Every other benchmark favors the Core 5 315. The largest margins appear in PassMark extended instructions, where the Core 5 315 leads by 39.9%, and in PassMark find prime numbers, where it leads by 53.6%. These are substantial, not marginal, differences. The Core 5 315 also dominates all five Cinebench tests, both single-core and multi-core, with consistent deltas of approximately 18.2% in every Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 iteration. That consistency across rendering workloads indicates a fundamental per-core performance advantage, not a workload-specific quirk.

For single-threaded responsiveness, the Core 5 315 wins PassMark single thread with 4021 versus 3506, a 12.8% lead. Data compression, encryption, floating-point math, physics simulation, multithread throughput, and random string sorting all go to the Core 5 315 as well, with margins ranging from 6.6% in data compression to 33.3% in floating-point math. The overall average benchmark scores confirm the hierarchy: the Core 5 315 records 18188 against 16148 for the Core 3 100U, a difference of 2040 points. The percentile rankings align, with the Core 5 315 at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs and the Core 3 100U at the 70th.

The data indicates a straightforward use-case split. For integer-heavy compute tasks, the Core 3 100U retains a measurable advantage. For rendering, encryption, compression, extended instruction workloads, physics, floating-point math, and general single-threaded performance, the Core 5 315 is the clear choice. The Core 5 315 also posts a higher PassMark multithread score of 15272 versus 12522, despite having fewer threads, which reinforces that its architectural efficiency compensates for the thread deficit.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge sharply in process technology and core organization. The Core 3 100U uses Intel's 10 nm process with a Raptor Lake architecture and the Raptor Lake-U codename. The Core 5 315 uses a 3 nm process with the Wildcat Lake codename. This process node difference of 10 nm versus 3 nm likely explains much of the Core 5 315's efficiency and per-clock performance advantage, though the database records no transistor counts or die sizes for either chip.

Core counts are identical at 6, but thread counts differ. The Core 3 100U supports 8 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading on some or all cores, while the Core 5 315 supports 6 threads, one per core. Despite the Core 3 100U's 33% thread advantage, the Core 5 315 still wins the multithread benchmark by 18%, underscoring the per-core performance gap.

Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. The Core 3 100U has 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315 has 192 KB of L1, 2.5 MB of L2, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 3 100U therefore has more total L3 cache, 10 MB versus 6 MB, while the Core 5 315 has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations. The Core 5 315's smaller L3 did not prevent it from winning cache-sensitive workloads in the recorded data.

Clock speeds favor the Core 3 100U on boost, with 4.70 GHz versus 4.40 GHz for the Core 5 315, but the Core 5 315 starts higher at 1.50 GHz base versus 1.20 GHz. Both chips carry a 15 W TDP and are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). Sockets differ: the Core 3 100U uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516. Memory support is another divider. The Core 3 100U supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The Core 5 315 supports only DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 3 100U has no recorded bandwidth figure.

PCIe connectivity differs modestly. The Core 3 100U provides Gen 4 with 8 CPU lanes, the Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 CPU lanes. Integrated graphics differ as well: the Core 3 100U uses UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. Neither chip supports ECC memory. Release dates are far apart: the Core 3 100U launched in January 2024, the Core 5 315 in April 2026.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are uniform. The Core 5 315 wins Cinebench R15 multi-core with 1308 against 1070, a 18.2% margin. Single-core R15 shows 184 versus 150, an 18.5% margin. Cinebench R20 multi-core gives 5452 versus 4462, again 18.2%. Single-core R20 gives 769 versus 629, 18.2%. Cinebench R23 multi-core records 12981 versus 10624, and single-core records 1832 versus 1499, both at 18.2% deltas. The consistency of these deltas suggests a fixed per-clock advantage that scales linearly across Cinebench's rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reveals where the Core 5 315 excels most. Extended instructions show 13143 versus 7894, a 39.9% lead. Find prime numbers shows 112 versus 52, a 53.6% lead. Floating-point math shows 42441 versus 28322, a 33.3% lead. Data encryption shows 11119 versus 8128, a 26.9% lead. Physics simulation shows 1163 versus 876, a 24.7% lead. These are the workloads where the Core 5 315's newer architecture and larger L1 and L2 caches appear to pay off most.

Medium-margin wins for the Core 5 315 include PassMark multithread at 15272 versus 12522, an 18% lead; random string sorting at 17551 versus 15191, a 13.4% lead; and single-thread at 4021 versus 3506, a 12.8% lead. Data compression is the narrowest Core 5 315 win: 146143 versus 136497, a 6.6% margin.

The single counter-example is PassMark integer math. The Core 3 100U scores 39580 versus 31690, a 24.9% lead. This is the only benchmark where the Core 3 100U's extra threads and higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz translate into a win. The magnitude of the integer math margin is notable, and it mirrors the direction of the thread count difference: 8 threads versus 6 threads, with the Core 3 100U ahead by exactly the sort of margin one might expect from two additional threads on integer-scalar work.

The nearest-rival data places both chips in similar company. The Core 3 100U's average score of 16148 sits 0.3% below the Intel Core i7-10850H, 0.5% below the Intel Core i5-10600KF, 1.1% below the Intel Core i7-1260U, and 1.2% below the AMD Ryzen 5 4600H. The Core 5 315's average score of 18188 matches the AMD EPYC 9274F exactly at a 0% delta, matches the Intel Core i7-9700 at a 0% delta, and sits 0.1% above the Intel Core i7-1365U and AMD Ryzen 7 5700U. The delta between the two chips, 2040 points in average score, is larger than the gap between the Core 3 100U and any of its nearest rivals, confirming that the Core 5 315 occupies a clearly higher performance tier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Intel Core 3 100U has 8 threads from 6 cores, while the Intel Core 5 315 has 6 threads from 6 cores.

Q: Does the Core 5 315 win every benchmark?

A: No. The Core 3 100U wins PassMark integer math with 39580 versus 31690, a 24.9% lead. The Core 5 315 wins the other 16 recorded head-to-head benchmarks.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two?

A: PassMark find prime numbers shows the largest gap, with the Core 5 315 scoring 112 versus 52 for the Core 3 100U, a 53.6% lead.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core 5 315 records an average benchmark score of 18188, while the Core 3 100U records 16148. The Core 5 315 also ranks at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs, versus the 70th percentile for the Core 3 100U.

Q: Do both processors use the same memory type?

A: No. The Core 3 100U supports DDR4 and DDR5 over a dual-channel bus. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X over a single-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Q: What are the release dates and launch MSRPs?

A: The Core 3 100U launched in January 2024 with a launch MSRP of $426. The Core 5 315 launched in April 2026 with a launch MSRP of $340.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear verdict for most workloads: the Intel Core 5 315 is the faster processor. It wins 16 of 17 benchmarks, including all Cinebench tests, all major PassMark throughput tests, and the single-threaded tests. Its average benchmark score of 18188 places it 2040 points above the Core 3 100U and at the 72nd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 5 315 achieves this with fewer threads, a lower boost clock, and a smaller L3 cache, which indicates that its 3 nm process and Wildcat Lake architecture deliver substantially higher per-core performance than the 10 nm Raptor Lake design.

The Core 3 100U is the pick only when integer math is the dominant workload. Its PassMark integer math score of 39580 beats the Core 5 315 by 24.9%, and its 8 threads give it a theoretical advantage in heavily threaded integer-scalar code. The Core 3 100U also has a higher boost clock at 4.70 GHz versus 4.40 GHz, a larger shared L3 cache at 10 MB versus 6 MB, dual-channel memory support, and 8 PCIe Gen 4 lanes versus 6. These features do not translate into benchmark wins outside integer math, but they remain relevant for specific system configurations.

For rendering, encryption, compression, floating-point work, physics simulation, extended instruction sets, and general single-threaded responsiveness, the Core 5 315 wins by margins from 6.6% to 53.6%. Its nearest-rival profile matches the AMD EPYC 9274F and Intel Core i7-9700 exactly, while the Core 3 100U sits closest to the Intel Core i7-10850H and Intel Core i5-10600KF. The Core 5 315 is the higher-performing mobile processor in the recorded data, and the Core 3 100U is the specialized alternative for integer-heavy workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 100U | Intel Core 5 315 |

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

| Cores | 6 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 6 |

| Base clock | 1.20 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.70 GHz | 4.40 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel BGA 1744 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-U | Wildcat Lake |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

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

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 cache | 10 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 64EU | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Release date | January 2024 | April 2026 |

| Launch MSRP | $426 | $340 |

| Part number | SRMYL | SAEFC |