Intel Core 3 100U vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark data positions the Intel Core 5 330 as the dominant processor in this comparison. It wins 16 of the 17 recorded head-to-head tests, with the Core 3 100U taking only a single victory. The Core 5 330 also achieves a higher average benchmark score of 18345 compared to the Core 3 100U's 16148, and it sits at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs versus the Core 3 100U's 70th percentile. The Core 5 330 posts a 19.2% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core (13150 vs 10624) and a 19.2% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core (1856 vs 1499). The Core 3 100U, however, holds a 19% advantage in PassMark integer math (39580 vs 33258), a result that reflects the performance characteristics of its architecture. The data indicates that the Core 5 330 is the better choice for compute-heavy mobile workloads, while the Core 3 100U retains a narrow edge in a specific integer-heavy task.

Architecture Differences

The two processors differ substantially in their underlying designs. The Intel Core 3 100U uses the Raptor Lake architecture, built on Raptor Lake-U, and is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel. The Intel Core 5 330 uses the Wildcat Lake architecture and is fabricated on a 3 nm process, also at Intel. Both processors have 6 cores, but the Core 3 100U supports 8 threads while the Core 5 330 supports 6 threads. This means the Core 3 100U has two additional threads via Hyper-Threading, yet the Core 5 330 still wins the multi-threaded benchmark tests, indicating that its per-core efficiency more than compensates for the thread deficit.

The cache layouts differ as well. The Core 3 100U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 330 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 330's larger L1 and L2 allocations help explain its stronger single-thread performance, while the Core 3 100U's larger L3 cache does not translate into a multi-core win.

Memory support separates the two clearly. The Core 3 100U supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel memory bus. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 5 330 also has fewer PCIe lanes: Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only) versus the Core 3 100U's Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). Integrated graphics differ too: the Core 3 100U uses UHD Graphics 64EU, while the Core 5 330 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe).

The Core 3 100U has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Core 5 330 has a higher base clock of 1.50 GHz and a slightly lower boost clock of 4.60 GHz. Both are 15 W TDP parts, both use mobile sockets (Intel BGA 1744 for the Core 3 100U, Intel BGA 1516 for the Core 5 330), and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 100U launched on 2024-01-07 with a launch MSRP of $426, while the Core 5 330 launched on 2026-04-15 with a launch MSRP of $309.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core 5 330 wins every Cinebench test by a nearly uniform margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1325 versus 1070, a 19.2% advantage. In R15 single-core, it scores 186 versus 150, a 19.4% advantage. In R20 multi-core, it scores 5523 versus 4462, a 19.2% advantage. In R20 single-core, it scores 779 versus 629, a 19.3% advantage. In R23 multi-core, it scores 13150 versus 10624, a 19.2% advantage. In R23 single-core, it scores 1856 versus 1499, a 19.2% advantage. This consistency suggests the Core 5 330's architectural efficiency delivers a structural performance edge across both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering workloads.

The PassMark suite reveals a more mixed picture. The Core 5 330 wins data compression (145287 vs 136497, a 6.1% edge), data encryption (11076 vs 8128, a 26.6% edge), extended instructions (12808 vs 7894, a 38.4% edge), find prime numbers (114 vs 52, a 54.4% edge), floating point math (43885 vs 28322, a 35.5% edge), multi-thread (15471 vs 12522, a 19.1% edge), physics (1201 vs 876, a 27.1% edge), random string sorting (17771 vs 15191, a 14.5% edge), and single-thread (4088 vs 3506, a 14.2% edge). The Core 3 100U wins only integer math (39580 vs 33258, a 19% edge).

The largest single gap in the entire comparison appears in PassMark find prime numbers, where the Core 5 330 is 54.4% ahead. The extended instructions gap of 38.4% and the floating point math gap of 35.5% further confirm the Core 5 330's strength in compute-heavy operations. The Core 3 100U's integer math win, by contrast, stands as the only benchmark where it outperforms, and it does so by a solid 19% margin, indicating that its Raptor Lake design retains a specific advantage in integer arithmetic that the Wildcat Lake core does not match.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345, while the Intel Core 3 100U has an average benchmark score of 16148. The Core 5 330 also holds the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, compared to the Core 3 100U's 70th percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23?

A: The Core 5 330 scores 13150 in R23 multi-core versus 10624 for the Core 3 100U, a 19.2% lead. In R23 single-core, the Core 5 330 scores 1856 versus 1499, also a 19.2% lead.

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

A: Yes. The Core 3 100U wins PassMark integer math with a score of 39580 against the Core 5 330's 33258, a 19% advantage. It is the only head-to-head test the Core 3 100U wins out of 17 recorded tests.

Q: What process nodes do the two processors use?

A: The Core 3 100U is fabricated on a 10 nm process, while the Core 5 330 is fabricated on a 3 nm process. Both are manufactured by Intel.

Q: How do the core and thread counts differ?

A: Both have 6 cores, but the Core 3 100U has 8 threads while the Core 5 330 has 6 threads. Despite having fewer threads, the Core 5 330 wins the multi-threaded benchmarks.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 100U supports DDR4 and DDR5 on a dual-channel bus. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X on a single-channel bus with a recorded memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 330 wins across rendering, encryption, compression, physics, and most math workloads. Its 19.2% lead in all three Cinebench multi-core tests and its 19.2% lead in all three Cinebench single-core tests make it the stronger choice for CPU rendering and single-threaded application response. The PassMark data reinforces this: it leads by 26.6% in data encryption, 38.4% in extended instructions, 54.4% in find prime numbers, 35.5% in floating point math, 27.1% in physics, and 14.2% in single-thread performance. These results indicate the Core 5 330 is better suited for scientific computing, encryption workloads, physics simulation, and general productivity tasks that rely on floating point throughput.

The Intel Core 3 100U wins exactly one test: PassMark integer math, with a 19% advantage (39580 vs 33258). This is a meaningful result for integer-heavy code paths, but it does not offset the Core 5 330's broader dominance across the other 16 tests. The Core 3 100U also has a dual-channel memory bus and 8 PCIe lanes versus the Core 5 330's single-channel bus and 6 PCIe lanes, which could matter for memory bandwidth-sensitive workloads that are not captured in the recorded benchmark scores. The Core 3 100U's larger 10 MB shared L3 cache versus the Core 5 330's 6 MB shared L3 cache may also benefit certain cache-heavy workloads, though the benchmark data does not show a corresponding win.

In summary, the Core 5 330 is the clear performance leader in the recorded data, with a 19.2% multi-core advantage and a 14.2% single-thread advantage that holds across nearly every test category. The Core 3 100U remains relevant only for the specific case of integer math performance, where it beats the Core 5 330 by 19%. The Core 5 330's higher average score of 18345, its 72nd percentile ranking, and its wins in 16 of 17 tests all point to the same conclusion: the Wildcat Lake design is the faster processor in this pairing.