Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core 5 210H Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark database records 17 head-to-head comparisons between the Intel Core 3 201E and the Intel Core 5 210H. The Core 5 210H dominates the matchup with 13 wins, while the Core 3 201E takes 4. The most decisive victories for the Core 5 210H come in multi-threaded workloads. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Core 5 210H scores 1757 against 1271 for the Core 3 201E, a 27.7% advantage. The single-core portion of that test shows a similar gap: 247 versus 179, a 27.5% lead for the Core 5 210H.

The gap narrows somewhat in Cinebench R20. The Core 5 210H posts 6504 in multicore versus 5297 for the Core 3 201E, an 18.6% lead. The single-core result follows the same pattern, with 918 against 747, also an 18.6% difference. PassMark integer math gives the Core 5 210H its largest win: 61503 versus 43894, a 28.6% margin. Floating point math shows a 26.2% lead for the Core 5 210H, with scores of 45057 and 33260. Data encryption favors the Core 5 210H by 26.7%, scoring 12187 against 8931. Data compression shows a 24.6% advantage for the Core 5 210H, with 217805 versus 164160.

The Core 3 201E fights back in several specific tests. Cinebench R23 multicore is its biggest win: 12613 versus 11830, a 6.6% margin. The single-core R23 result is nearly identical, with 1780 against 1771, a 0.5% edge. PassMark physics gives the Core 3 201E a 9.7% win, scoring 1141 versus 1040. The remaining Core 3 victory comes in PassMark find prime numbers, where it scores 57 against 53, a 7.5% difference.

The closest overall result is in PassMark single-thread, where the Core 5 210H leads by just 1.6%, scoring 3539 versus 3482. This near-tie indicates that raw single-core capability is comparable between the two, despite the Core 5 210H winning the majority of tests.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clear split in workload types. The Intel Core 5 210H excels in nearly every throughput-oriented task. Its wins span Cinebench R15 and R20 (both multicore and single-core), PassMark integer math, floating point math, data compression, data encryption, extended instructions, random string sorting, multithread, and single-thread tests. These results point to strong performance in rendering, scientific computation, file compression, and general productivity applications that can use multiple threads.

The Intel Core 3 201E wins in four narrower categories. Cinebench R23 multicore and single-core results suggest it has a slight advantage in that specific rendering workload. PassMark physics and find prime numbers are the other two wins, indicating strength in simulation-style tasks and prime-number calculations. The physics result is notable because it runs on a single thread, yet the Core 3 201E beats the Core 5 210H by 9.7% in that specific test.

For users running mixed workloads, the Core 5 210H is the safer choice based on the sheer number of wins. The Core 3 201E is competitive in specific rendering and physics scenarios but falls behind in most other measured tasks. The average benchmark score reflects this: the Core 5 210H averages 24872 across all tests, while the Core 3 201E averages 19056. The Core 5 210H sits at the 77th percentile among all CPUs in the database, while the Core 3 201E sits at the 73rd.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel families. The Core 3 201E is based on Bartlett Lake and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The Core 5 210H uses a Raptor Lake architecture, specifically Raptor Lake-H, and belongs to the Core 5 generation with a Raptor Lake Refresh label. Both are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and fabricated by Intel.

Core counts differ substantially. The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads. The Core 5 210H uses a hybrid configuration, which explains the odd thread count. The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating a uniform core layout. Both processors share the same L1 cache size at 80 KB per core. The L2 cache differs: the Core 3 201E has 1.25 MB per core, while the Core 5 210H has 2 MB per core. Total L3 cache is identical at 12 MB shared.

Clock speeds show a contrast. The Core 3 201E has a base clock of 3.60 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 5 210H has a lower base clock of 2.20 GHz but matches the 4.80 GHz boost. The higher base clock on the Core 3 201E likely contributes to its competitive single-thread results despite having fewer cores.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730, while the Core 5 210H uses Iris Xe Graphics 48EU. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 210H does not. Both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. The Core 3 201E has a measured memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, while the Core 5 210H has no recorded bandwidth figure in the database.

PCIe connectivity differs. The Core 3 201E provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU, while the Core 5 210H provides Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Core 3 201E uses an Intel Socket 1700, designed for desktop platforms. The Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, a mobile socket. The Core 3 201E is a desktop part with a 60 W TDP, while the Core 5 210H is a mobile part with a 45 W TDP.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads. The Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: Yes, both support DDR4 and DDR5 memory in dual-channel configuration. However, the Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the Core 5 210H does not.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: Both processors have the same boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Core 3 201E has a higher base clock at 3.60 GHz, while the Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz.

Q: How do they compare in the database's average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H has an average benchmark score of 24872, placing it at the 77th percentile. The Intel Core 3 201E has an average score of 19056, placing it at the 73rd percentile.

Q: Which processor wins more head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H wins 13 of 17 recorded head-to-head benchmarks. The Intel Core 3 201E wins 4.

Q: What are the socket requirements for each?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700, a desktop socket. The Intel Core 5 210H uses Intel BGA 1744, a mobile socket.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201E | Intel Core 5 210H |

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

| Cores | 4 | 8 |

| Threads | 8 | 12 |

| Base Clock | 3.60 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.80 GHz | 4.80 GHz |

| TDP | 60 W | 45 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1744 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Raptor Lake-H |

| Generation | Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) | Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh) |

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 12 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | Not recorded |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe Lanes (CPU) | 16 | 8 |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Iris Xe Graphics 48EU |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Launch Date | 2025-01-12 | 2024-12-17 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | $342 |

The Verdict

The Intel Core 5 210H is the stronger performer in the majority of recorded benchmarks. It wins 13 of 17 head-to-head tests and holds a 30% higher average benchmark score (24872 versus 19056). Its 8-core, 12-thread configuration gives it a decisive edge in multi-threaded workloads such as Cinebench R15 and R20 multicore, PassMark integer math, floating point math, and data compression. The Core 5 210H also leads in single-thread performance by a small margin, winning both PassMark single-thread tests by 1.6%.

The Intel Core 3 201E wins in Cinebench R23 multicore by 6.6% and in PassMark physics by 9.7%. It also edges out the Core 5 210H in find prime numbers by 7.5%. These wins suggest the Core 3 201E has specific strengths in certain rendering and physics workloads, but they are isolated results. The Core 3 201E also requires a desktop socket (Socket 1700) and carries a 60 W TDP, while the Core 5 210H is a mobile part with a 45 W TDP.

The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, which the Core 5 210H does not. The Core 3 201E also provides more PCIe lanes from the CPU (16 versus 8). These features make the Core 3 201E suitable for specific desktop builds where ECC support or additional PCIe lanes matter. The Core 5 210H, by contrast, offers more cores and threads, a higher average benchmark score, and a broader set of benchmark wins. The data indicates that users prioritizing overall processing performance should select the Core 5 210H, while those needing ECC memory or a desktop socket with more PCIe lanes should consider the Core 3 201E.