Intel Core 3 100UL vs Intel Core 5 315 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark entries for the Intel Core 3 100UL and the Intel Core 5 315. The Core 3 100UL has no recorded benchmark scores, while the Core 5 315 has a full suite of Cinebench and PassMark results. This lack of comparative data means the analysis must rely on the Core 5 315's absolute scores and its standing against nearest rivals, not on a direct matchup.

The Core 5 315 posts an average benchmark score of 18188, which places it in the 72nd percentile of all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the AMD EPYC 9274F at 18189 (a 0% delta), the Intel Core i7-9700 at 18180 (0% delta), the Intel Core i7-1365U at 18177 (0.1% delta), and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U at 18176 (0.1% delta). The Core 5 315 essentially matches the EPYC 9274F, a server-class part, and edges out the Core i7-9700 by a negligible margin. This positioning indicates the Core 5 315 delivers desktop-class throughput from a mobile platform.

In Cinebench R23, the Core 5 315 scores 12981 in multi-core and 1832 in single-core. The R20 results show 5452 multi-core and 769 single-core, while R15 shows 1308 multi-core and 184 single-core. These scores demonstrate a consistent scaling across benchmark versions, with the multi-core figure roughly seven times the single-core figure in each R15, R20, and R23 test. The ratio holds steady, which suggests balanced performance across both lightly threaded and heavily threaded workloads.

PassMark results for the Core 5 315 show data compression at 146143, data encryption at 11119, extended instructions at 13143, and prime number finding at 112. Floating point math scores 42441, integer math scores 31690, and multithread scores 15272. The single-thread PassMark score is 4021, while random string sorting hits 17551 and physics reaches 1163. The data compression score stands out as the highest absolute number in the suite, indicating strong memory and cache handling for compressible data streams. The prime number score of 112 is comparatively low, which is typical for CPUs that prioritize branch prediction and integer pipelines over pure prime-sieving workloads.

The Core 3 100UL has no benchmark data in the database, so its wins cannot be quantified. The head-to-head wins counter shows 0 for both parts. The absence of scores for the Core 3 100UL means any direct comparison of measured performance is impossible. The analysis must therefore treat the Core 5 315 as the only part with verified results.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 315 wins in every measurable category because it is the only part with recorded benchmarks. Its 12981 multi-core Cinebench R23 score and 1832 single-core score place it firmly in the mid-range desktop class despite its mobile socket and 15W TDP. The 72nd percentile ranking confirms it outperforms the majority of CPUs in the database, including several older desktop i7 parts and a high-end EPYC server chip.

For single-threaded tasks, the PassMark single-thread score of 4021 and Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1832 indicate strong per-core efficiency. The 4.40 GHz boost clock supports this, though the boost frequency is slightly lower than the Core 3 100UL's 4.50 GHz. The Core 3 100UL, with 6 cores and 8 threads versus the Core 5 315's 6 cores and 6 threads, would theoretically handle simultaneous multithreading workloads better if it had scores, but no data supports that claim.

The Core 5 315's memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, enabled by DDR5 and LPDDR5X support, pairs with the 146143 data compression score to suggest strong throughput for data-heavy tasks. The single-channel memory bus is a limitation, but the recorded scores indicate it does not cripple overall performance. The 6 MB shared L3 cache is smaller than the Core 3 100UL's 10 MB shared L3, yet the Core 5 315's 3nm process node likely compensates with lower latency and higher efficiency.

The Core 3 100UL cannot claim a win in any category because no benchmark results exist. Its 50th percentile ranking, which is the default value for parts without scores, does not reflect actual performance. The Core 5 315's 72nd percentile is a measured statistic, not an estimate.

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core 5 315 compare to its nearest rivals in the database?

A: The Core 5 315 scores 18188 on average. The AMD EPYC 9274F scores 18189, a 0% difference. The Intel Core i7-9700 scores 18180, also a 0% difference. The Core i7-1365U scores 18177, a 0.1% difference, and the AMD Ryzen 7 5700U scores 18176, a 0.1% difference. The Core 5 315 effectively ties all four rivals.

Q: What is the Core 5 315's best benchmark result?

A: The highest absolute score is in PassMark data compression at 146143. The next highest is Cinebench R23 multi-core at 12981, followed by PassMark floating point math at 42441 and integer math at 31690.

Q: Does the Core 3 100UL have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The Core 3 100UL has an empty benchmarks array, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed. Its percentile of 50 is a placeholder, not a measured result.

Q: What is the Core 5 315's single-thread performance?

A: The PassMark single-thread score is 4021. Cinebench R23 single-core is 1832, R20 single-core is 769, and R15 single-core is 184. These scores place it near the top of the mobile segment.

Q: Which CPU has the higher boost clock?

A: The Core 3 100UL has a boost clock of 4.50 GHz, while the Core 5 315 has a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. The Core 3 100UL also has a lower base clock at 1.20 GHz versus the Core 5 315's 1.50 GHz.

Q: What is the Core 5 315's market segment and socket?

A: The Core 5 315 is a mobile part on Intel BGA 1516 with a release date of April 15, 2026. The Core 3 100UL is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1700 with a release date of April 7, 2024.

Specification Differences

The Core 3 100UL and Core 5 315 differ in several specification fields. The Core 3 100UL uses 6 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 315 uses 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 3 100UL has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Core 5 315 has a base clock of 1.50 GHz and a boost clock of 4.40 GHz. Both have a TDP of 15W.

The sockets differ: the Core 3 100UL uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core 5 315 uses Intel BGA 1516. The Core 3 100UL is a desktop part, while the Core 5 315 is a mobile part. The Core 3 100UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel mode. The Core 5 315 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X in single-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s. The Core 3 100UL has no memory bandwidth figure recorded.

The PCIe configurations differ: the Core 3 100UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 315 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). The integrated graphics differ: the Core 3 100UL uses UHD Graphics 64EU, and the Core 5 315 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe). The Core 5 315 has a launch MSRP of $340. The Core 3 100UL has no launch MSRP recorded. Neither CPU has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 100UL is built on Raptor Lake architecture with the codename Raptor Lake-PS and a 10 nm process node from Intel. The Core 5 315 uses Wildcat Lake architecture with a 3 nm process node, also from Intel. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 3 nm, which affects transistor density and power efficiency, though the exact transistor counts are not recorded for either part.

The cache structures differ significantly. The Core 3 100UL 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 5 315 has 192 KB of L1 cache, 2.5 MB of L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 315's L1 and L2 figures are listed as total values rather than per-core values, making direct comparison difficult. The Core 5 315 has a smaller L3 cache overall, but its 3nm process and newer architecture may deliver better per-clock efficiency.

The generation field confirms the split: the Core 3 100UL is listed as Core 3 (Raptor Lake-PS), and the Core 5 315 is listed as Core 5 (Wildcat Lake). The Core 5 315's part number is SAEFC, while the Core 3 100UL's part number is unknown. Both CPUs have ECC memory support disabled. The Core 5 315's single-channel memory bus is a notable architectural limitation compared to the Core 3 100UL's dual-channel bus, though the Core 5 315 compensates with a recorded 59.7 GB/s bandwidth.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion: the Intel Core 5 315 is the validated performer. It has a full benchmark suite, a 72nd percentile ranking, and an average score of 18188 that ties or beats four nearest rivals. The Core 3 100UL has no scores, no rivals, and no measurable performance data. Any selection between these two parts must favor the Core 5 315 on the basis of verified results alone.

The Core 5 315 suits workloads that benefit from strong single-thread and multi-thread performance in a mobile form factor. Its 3nm process, 4.40 GHz boost clock, and 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth make it a practical choice for portable systems. The Core 3 100UL, with its dual-channel memory, larger 10 MB L3 cache, and 4.50 GHz boost clock, has theoretical advantages on paper, but the absence of benchmark data prevents any quantitative confirmation.

Buyers should treat the Core 3 100UL as an unproven part in this database. The Core 5 315, by contrast, has measurable results that place it in the top quartile of all CPUs. The 6-core, 6-thread configuration of the Core 5 315 does not support hyper-threading, but its recorded Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12981 indicates it does not need it to compete. The Core 5 315 is the only defensible choice based on the data.