Intel Core 3 100UL vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts differ between the Intel Core 3 100UL and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL has 6 cores and 8 threads, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Qualcomm part offers two additional physical cores, but both processors support the same thread count.

Q: What are the clock speed profiles of each processor?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL has a base clock of 1.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.50 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 starts at a higher 3.40 GHz base clock but boosts to a lower 4.00 GHz.

Q: Which processor has a more advanced manufacturing process?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC, whereas the Intel Core 3 100UL uses Intel's 10 nm process. The Qualcomm node is denser, which typically correlates with improved power efficiency.

Q: What memory types are supported by each chip?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s.

Q: How do the cache hierarchies compare?

A: The Intel part features 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. The Qualcomm part uses 288 KB L1 per core, 12 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3. The Qualcomm chip has substantially larger L1 and L2 allocations, while Intel provides more L3 cache.

Q: What are the market segments and sockets for these processors?

A: The Intel Core 3 100UL is a desktop processor using Intel Socket 1700. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 is a mobile processor using Qualcomm BGA 2073.

The Verdict

The data indicates a clear divide in intended use cases. The Intel Core 3 100UL is positioned for desktop systems, with its Raptor Lake architecture, DDR4/DDR5 support, and Intel Socket 1700. Its lower 15 W TDP suggests a focus on efficiency within a desktop context, while the 4.50 GHz boost clock provides strong single-thread capability when needed.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 targets mobile platforms. Its 30 W TDP is higher, but the 4 nm TSMC process and LPDDR5X memory support point toward a design optimized for integrated performance in thin-and-light devices. The 8-core configuration with 8 threads gives it a raw core-count advantage, and the larger L2 cache per module (12 MB) indicates a design favoring data locality.

For workloads that rely on high boost clocks and mature x86 desktop ecosystem compatibility, the Intel Core 3 100UL is the logical choice. Its 4.50 GHz boost clock is 0.50 GHz higher than the Qualcomm's 4.00 GHz, which can translate to faster single-thread responsiveness in legacy desktop applications.

For multi-threaded mobile workloads where sustained performance and memory bandwidth matter, the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 holds the structural edge. Its 8 cores, 135.2 GB/s memory bandwidth, and 4 nm process give it a combination of parallelism and efficiency that the Intel part cannot match on paper.

Neither processor has recorded benchmark scores or nearest rival data in the database, so the verdict rests on architectural specifications alone. The Intel part suits desktop builds where boost clock and socket compatibility are primary. The Qualcomm part suits mobile designs where core count, cache size, and memory bandwidth are prioritized.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no recorded head-to-head benchmark results for this pairing. Both processors have an average benchmark score of zero and no nearest rivals listed. As such, a quantitative comparison based on measured performance is not possible from the available data.

What can be analyzed is the specification-driven performance potential. The Intel Core 3 100UL has a 0.50 GHz higher boost clock (4.50 GHz versus 4.00 GHz). In short-burst workloads that scale with clock frequency, this delta suggests an advantage for Intel. Conversely, the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 has a 2.20 GHz higher base clock (3.40 GHz versus 1.20 GHz), which implies better sustained performance in workloads that do not trigger boost states.

Core count favors Qualcomm by two cores (8 versus 6). Thread count is identical at 8. This means the Qualcomm part can distribute work across more physical cores, which may benefit parallel tasks that do not rely on simultaneous multithreading.

Cache capacity differs significantly. The Qualcomm part has 288 KB L1 per core versus 80 KB per core for Intel, a 3.6x larger allocation. Its L2 cache is 12 MB per module versus 1.25 MB per core for Intel. The Intel part counters with 10 MB shared L3 versus 6 MB shared L3 for Qualcomm, a 4 MB difference in favor of Intel.

Memory bandwidth is only recorded for the Qualcomm part at 135.2 GB/s. The Intel part has no recorded bandwidth figure, so no direct comparison is possible. However, the Qualcomm's LPDDR5X support with that bandwidth figure suggests a high-throughput memory subsystem.

PCIe lane counts differ: the Intel part provides 8 lanes of Gen 4, while the Qualcomm part provides 12 lanes of Gen 4. This gives Qualcomm a 4-lane advantage for peripheral connectivity.

In the absence of benchmark data, the largest "wins" are structural: Qualcomm leads in cores, base clock, L1/L2 cache, memory bandwidth, PCIe lanes, and process node. Intel leads in boost clock and L3 cache.

Specification Differences

• Cores: Intel 6, Qualcomm 8
• Threads: Intel 8, Qualcomm 8
• Base Clock: Intel 1.20 GHz, Qualcomm 3.40 GHz
• Boost Clock: Intel 4.50 GHz, Qualcomm 4.00 GHz
• TDP: Intel 15 W, Qualcomm 30 W
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700, Qualcomm BGA 2073
• Process Node: Intel 10 nm, Qualcomm 4 nm
• Foundry: Intel, TSMC
• L1 Cache: Intel 80 KB per core, Qualcomm 288 KB per core
• L2 Cache: Intel 1.25 MB per core, Qualcomm 12 MB per module
• L3 Cache: Intel 10 MB shared, Qualcomm 6 MB shared
• Memory Support: Intel DDR4/DDR5, Qualcomm LPDDR5X
• Memory Bandwidth: Intel not recorded, Qualcomm 135.2 GB/s
• PCIe: Intel Gen 4, 8 lanes, Qualcomm Gen 4, 12 lanes
• Integrated Graphics: Intel UHD Graphics 64EU, Qualcomm Adreno X1-45
• Market Segment: Intel Desktop, Qualcomm Mobile
• Release Date: Intel 2024-04-07, Qualcomm 2024-09-02
• Part Number: Intel unknown, Qualcomm X1P46100

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 100UL uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-PS codename. It belongs to the Core 3 generation. The process node is 10 nm, fabricated by Intel. The architecture is a mature x86 design with a 6-core, 8-thread configuration. The 15 W TDP and Intel Socket 1700 indicate a desktop-oriented design that prioritizes compatibility with existing motherboard ecosystems. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 64EU. The cache hierarchy is conventional: 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 10 MB shared L3. Memory support spans both DDR4 and DDR5, which provides flexibility for different platform tiers.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-46-100 uses the Oryon codename and belongs to the Snapdragon X (Plus) generation. Its architecture is built on a 4 nm process by TSMC. This is a mobile-focused design with a 30 W TDP and Qualcomm BGA 2073 socket. The 8-core, 8-thread configuration is symmetric, with no simultaneous multithreading. The cache hierarchy is notably different: 288 KB L1 per core is more than triple the Intel allocation, and 12 MB L2 per module is substantially larger than Intel's per-core L2. The shared L3 is smaller at 6 MB. The memory subsystem uses LPDDR5X with a recorded bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s, which is typical for low-power mobile memory. The integrated graphics are Adreno X1-45. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 12 lanes, exceeding the Intel part's 8 lanes.

Process node differences matter. The 4 nm TSMC process versus Intel's 10 nm process represents a significant generational gap in transistor density. This affects power efficiency and thermal behavior, though TDP figures alone should not be read as direct power consumption. The Qualcomm part has a higher TDP at 30 W, which is consistent with its higher base clock and larger cache arrays.

The Intel part's architecture uses Raptor Lake, a refined version of Intel's hybrid-performance design, though the core configuration here is a 6-core, 8-thread setup without the heterogeneous core types seen in some other Raptor Lake parts. The Qualcomm Oryon cores are custom ARM-based designs, which explains the different cache organization and the absence of x86 compatibility.

Cache architecture differences are structural. Intel's 1.25 MB L2 per core is a per-core allocation, while Qualcomm's 12 MB per module suggests a shared L2 within a module of cores. This can improve data sharing among cores in the same module. The larger L1 caches on Qualcomm reduce latency for frequently accessed data.

The integrated graphics differ by vendor: Intel UHD Graphics 64EU versus Qualcomm Adreno X1-45. Both are integrated solutions, but their performance characteristics are not recorded in the database.

Release dates differ by about five months, with Intel launching on 2024-04-07 and Qualcomm on 2024-09-02. Both parts are listed as Active in production status. Neither has a recorded launch MSRP, and neither has a benchmark score or percentile ranking beyond the neutral 50th percentile placeholder in the database.