Intel Core 3 100UL vs Intel Core Ultra 9 285 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 3 100UL and Intel Core Ultra 9 285 occupy opposite ends of Intel's desktop lineup, and the benchmark data reflects that divide clearly. However, the Core 3 100UL has no recorded benchmark scores in the database, while the Core Ultra 9 285 has a full set of measurements across Cinebench and Passmark tests. This absence of data for the Core 3 100UL means the head-to-head comparison is asymmetrical: the Core Ultra 9 285's scores stand alone, and the Core 3 100UL's performance must be inferred from its architectural specifications rather than measured results.

The Core Ultra 9 285 delivers a Cinebench R23 multicore score of 48945 and a single-core score of 6909. In Cinebench R20, it records 20556 multicore and 2901 single-core. The Cinebench R15 results show 4933 multicore and 696 single-core. These scores place the processor at the 95th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 75488. The nearest rivals in the database include the AMD EPYC 8224P at 75582 (0.1% ahead), the AMD EPYC 4545P at 75373 (0.2% behind), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D at 75716 (0.3% ahead), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 at 75738 (0.3% ahead). The Core Ultra 9 285 sits within a narrow band of these competitors, trailing the closest rival by only 0.1% and leading another by 0.2%.

Passmark results for the Core Ultra 9 285 show a multithread score of 56602 and a single-thread score of 4881. The integer math test produces 164869, floating point math produces 194988, and extended instructions produce 45357. Data compression scores 602121, data encryption scores 46949, and random string sorting scores 73651. The physics test records 3598, and the find prime numbers test records 459. These results confirm consistent strength across both integer-heavy and floating-point-heavy workloads.

Because the Core 3 100UL has no benchmark entries, the database records zero wins for it and zero wins for the Core Ultra 9 285 in a head-to-head sense. The comparison instead rests on the architectural gap between the two parts.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 9 285 wins in every measurable category because it is the only one of the two with recorded benchmark data. Its Cinebench R23 multicore score of 48945 indicates strong parallel processing capability, driven by 24 cores and 24 threads. The single-core score of 6909 in the same test shows high per-thread performance, supported by a boost clock of 5.60 GHz. The Passmark multithread score of 56602 and single-thread score of 4881 reinforce this dual strength. In the database, the processor's 95th percentile standing among all CPUs means it outperforms the vast majority of recorded parts.

The Core 3 100UL, by contrast, has no benchmark scores, so it cannot be said to win any measured workload. Its specifications suggest a different role: 6 cores, 8 threads, a base clock of 1.20 GHz, and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. Its thermal design power of 15 watts is far lower than the Core Ultra 9 285's 65 watts, which indicates the Core 3 100UL is built for efficiency rather than maximum throughput. The architecture is Raptor Lake on a 10 nm process, compared to the Core Ultra 9 285's Arrow Lake on a 3 nm process. The Core 3 100UL supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only. These differences point to the Core 3 100UL as a low-power desktop part suited to tasks that do not demand heavy multithreading, while the Core Ultra 9 285 targets high-performance desktop workloads.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel architectures and manufacturing nodes. The Core 3 100UL uses Raptor Lake, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arrow Lake, specifically Arrow Lake-S, built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. This process difference is substantial: the 3 nm node allows the Core Ultra 9 285 to pack 17800 million transistors into a 243 mm² die, while the Core 3 100UL has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Core counts differ sharply. The Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads, which indicates a hybrid arrangement where some cores support additional threads. The Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, meaning no simultaneous multithreading is present. The Core Ultra 9 285's base clock of 2.50 GHz and boost clock of 5.60 GHz both exceed the Core 3 100UL's 1.20 GHz base and 4.50 GHz boost. The Core Ultra 9 285 also has a higher thermal design power at 65 watts versus 15 watts.

Cache hierarchies differ in both size and organization. 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 Ultra 9 285 has 192 KB of L1 cache per core, 3 MB of L2 cache per core, and 36 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core Ultra 9 285 therefore holds more data closer to the cores, which supports its higher clock speeds and wider workload capacity.

Memory support also diverges. The Core 3 100UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only, also in dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 102.4 GB/s. The Core 3 100UL has no memory bandwidth figure in the database. ECC memory is not supported on the Core 3 100UL but is supported on the Core Ultra 9 285.

PCIe connectivity differs as well. The Core 3 100UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the Core Ultra 9 285 provides Gen 5 with 20 lanes. The integrated graphics also differ: the Core 3 100UL uses UHD Graphics 64EU, and the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU. Both have 64 execution units, but the architectures are different generations.

The Core Ultra 9 285 belongs to the Core Ultra Series 2 and the Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) generation. Its part number is SRQD4. The Core 3 100UL belongs to the Core 3 (Raptor Lake-PS) generation. The Core 3 100UL uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851, making the two physically incompatible with each other's motherboards. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The Core 3 100UL was released on 2024-04-07, and the Core Ultra 9 285 was released on 2024-12-31. The Core Ultra 9 285 has a launch MSRP of $579.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 9 285 has 24 cores and 24 threads, while the Intel Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads.

Q: What is the boost clock difference?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 boosts to 5.60 GHz, and the Core 3 100UL boosts to 4.50 GHz.

Q: Do both processors support DDR5 memory?

A: Yes, both support DDR5. The Core 3 100UL also supports DDR4, while the Core Ultra 9 285 supports DDR5 only.

Q: How does the Core Ultra 9 285 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core Ultra 9 285 has an average benchmark score of 75488. The AMD EPYC 8224P scores 75582 (0.1% higher), the AMD EPYC 4545P scores 75373 (0.2% lower), the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755X3D scores 75716 (0.3% higher), and the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 9755 scores 75738 (0.3% higher).

Q: What is the thermal design power of each processor?

A: The Core 3 100UL has a TDP of 15 watts, and the Core Ultra 9 285 has a TDP of 65 watts.

Q: Do the processors use the same socket?

A: No. The Core 3 100UL uses Intel Socket 1700, and the Core Ultra 9 285 uses Intel Socket 1851.

The Verdict

The data in the database makes the choice straightforward for workloads that demand measured performance: the Intel Core Ultra 9 285 is the only one of the two with benchmark results, and those results place it at the 95th percentile of all CPUs. Its 24 cores, 36 MB of L3 cache, 5.60 GHz boost clock, and 102.4 GB/s memory bandwidth give it a commanding position for multithreaded and single-threaded tasks alike. The Cinebench R23 multicore score of 48945 and single-core score of 6909 confirm that it handles both parallel and latency-sensitive workloads without a notable weakness. Its nearest rivals in the database are all within 0.3% of its average benchmark score, which indicates the Core Ultra 9 285 is competitive with high-end server and workstation parts.

The Intel Core 3 100UL has no benchmark scores, so the database cannot confirm its performance. Its specifications suggest a low-power part: 6 cores, 8 threads, a 15 watt TDP, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5. The 10 nm Raptor Lake architecture and Intel Socket 1700 compatibility place it in a different category entirely, one aimed at efficiency and basic desktop tasks rather than maximum throughput. The lack of ECC support and the smaller cache hierarchy reinforce this positioning.

For users who require the highest recorded performance in the database, the Core Ultra 9 285 is the clear selection. For users who need a low-power desktop processor with modest core counts and flexible memory support, the Core 3 100UL is the only option that matches those specifications. The two parts do not compete in the same performance class, and the benchmark data reflects that reality.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 100UL | Intel Core Ultra 9 285 |

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

| Series | None | Core Ultra Series 2 |

| Cores | 6 | 24 |

| Threads | 8 | 24 |

| Base clock | 1.20 GHz | 2.50 GHz |

| Boost clock | 4.50 GHz | 5.60 GHz |

| TDP | 15 W | 65 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel Socket 1851 |

| Architecture | Raptor Lake | Arrow Lake |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Arrow Lake-S |

| Generation | Core 3 (Raptor Lake-PS) | Ultra 9 (Arrow Lake) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 17800 million |

| Die size | Not recorded | 243 mm² |

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

| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 3 MB (per core) |

| L3 cache | 10 MB (shared) | 36 MB (shared) |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5 |

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

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 102.4 GB/s |

| ECC memory | No | Yes |

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

| Integrated graphics | UHD Graphics 64EU | Arc Xe-LPG Graphics 64EU |

| Market segment | Desktop | Desktop |

| Production status | Active | Active |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2024-12-31 |

| Launch MSRP | Not recorded | $579 |

| Multiplier unlocked | No | No |

| Part number | Unknown | SRQD4 |

| Percentile vs all CPUs | 50 | 95 |

| Average benchmark score | 0 | 75488 |