CPU Comparison

The Intel Core 3 201E and Intel Core i5-1335U occupy different ends of the Intel lineup, yet their average benchmark scores land within 0.4% of each other. The Core 3 201E, a desktop part on Socket 1700, edges out the mobile i5-1335U with an average score of 19056 versus 18982, placing both in the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The head-to-head data shows a clear split: the Core 3 201E wins 11 of 17 benchmarks, while the i5-1335U takes 6, but the nature of those wins reveals distinct architectural priorities that matter more than the final tally.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 3 201E boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core i5-1335U reaches 4.60 GHz. The desktop part also has a much higher base clock of 3.60 GHz compared to the mobile chip's 1300.00 MHz.

Q: How do the two compare in multi-threaded Cinebench performance?

A: The Core 3 201E leads decisively in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 12613 versus 8889.5, a 41.9% advantage. However, in the older Cinebench R15 multi-core test, the i5-1335U wins with 1464 against 1271, a 13.2% margin.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-1335U has 10 cores and 12 threads. Despite having fewer cores, the Core 3 201E delivers higher multi-core scores in most modern benchmarks.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: No. The Core 3 201E supports ECC memory, while the i5-1335U does not. This is a notable differentiator for workstation or reliability-focused builds.

Q: Which chip has the faster integrated graphics?

A: The i5-1335U features Iris Xe Graphics 80EU, whereas the Core 3 201E uses UHD Graphics 730. The mobile part's graphics solution is generally more capable for integrated use.

Q: What is the PCIe generation difference?

A: The Core 3 201E supports PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-1335U is limited to PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). This gives the desktop chip twice the lane count and a newer generation.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same 10 nm Intel process node and use the same 80 KB L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB L2 cache per core, but their underlying designs diverge significantly. The Core 3 201E is built on the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation, while the i5-1335U uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-U codename. The desktop part is a monolithic 4-core, 8-thread design with a die size of 163 mm², whereas the mobile chip packs 10 cores and 12 threads into a smaller package without a listed die size.

The core configuration is the most striking difference. The i5-1335U's 10 cores and 12 threads suggest a hybrid architecture typical of Raptor Lake-U, likely combining performance and efficiency cores. The Core 3 201E's 4 cores and 8 threads are uniform, which explains its higher base clock of 3.60 GHz versus the i5's 1300.00 MHz base. Both share 12 MB of L3 cache, but the desktop part's higher clocks compensate for its lower core count in many workloads.

Memory support is identical in terms of types (DDR4 and DDR5) and bus width (dual-channel). However, the Core 3 201E offers a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s and ECC support, while the i5-1335U has no listed bandwidth figure and no ECC. The PCIe interface also differs: the desktop chip provides Gen 5 with 16 lanes, while the mobile part is limited to Gen 4 with 8 lanes. The TDP gap is massive, 60 watts for the Core 3 201E versus 15 watts for the i5-1335U, which reflects their different market segments (Desktop versus Mobile) and socket requirements (Socket 1700 versus BGA 1744).

Where Each One Wins

The Core 3 201E dominates in sustained multi-threaded compute and single-thread performance in modern workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 12613 is 41.9% higher than the i5-1335U's 8889.5, and it also wins Cinebench R20 multi-core by 7.3% (5297 versus 4935). In PassMark tests, it leads in extended instructions (11035 versus 8974, a 23% gap), find prime numbers (57 versus 48, 18.8% higher), physics (1141 versus 837, a 36.3% margin), and multithread (14839 versus 14281, 3.9% ahead). Single-thread performance also favors the desktop chip, with Cinebench R23 single-core at 1780 versus 1684.5 (5.7% higher) and PassMark single-thread at 3482 versus 3336 (4.4% higher).

The i5-1335U wins in specific workloads that benefit from its higher core count or different microarchitecture. It takes Cinebench R15 multi-core (1464 versus 1271, 13.2% ahead) and Cinebench R15 single-core (238 versus 179, a 24.8% margin). In PassMark, it leads in data encryption (10009 versus 8931, 10.8% higher), floating point math (35176 versus 33260, 5.4% ahead), integer math (51244 versus 43894, a 14.3% advantage), and random string sorting (17953 versus 17783, 0.9% higher). The i5-1335U also has a better integrated GPU with Iris Xe Graphics 80EU versus UHD Graphics 730, making it more suitable for light gaming or media tasks without a discrete card.

The use-case split is clear: the Core 3 201E excels in productivity, physics simulation, and extended instruction workloads where raw clock speed and consistent power delivery matter. The i5-1335U is better suited for encryption-heavy tasks, math-intensive floating point operations, and scenarios where its 10-core configuration can be fully utilized, as seen in Cinebench R15 and integer math.

Specification Differences

The two chips differ in nearly every key specification. The Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i5-1335U has 10 cores and 12 threads. Base clocks are dramatically different: 3.60 GHz for the desktop part versus 1300.00 MHz for the mobile chip. Boost clocks are closer, with the Core 3 201E at 4.80 GHz and the i5-1335U at 4.60 GHz. TDP is a major separator, 60 watts versus 15 watts, reflecting the desktop versus mobile power envelope.

Socket compatibility is entirely different: the Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700, while the i5-1335U uses Intel BGA 1744. The desktop chip has a die size of 163 mm², while the mobile part's die size is not listed. PCIe support differs by generation and lane count: Gen 5 with 16 lanes for the Core 3 201E versus Gen 4 with 8 lanes for the i5-1335U. ECC memory is supported only on the Core 3 201E.

The integrated graphics solutions differ, with UHD Graphics 730 on the desktop part and Iris Xe Graphics 80EU on the mobile chip. Memory bandwidth is listed at 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201E but not provided for the i5-1335U. Release dates are also distinct: the Core 3 201E launched on 2025-01-12, while the i5-1335U launched on 2023-01-03. The part numbers are SRVTR for the desktop chip and SRMEX for the mobile chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The largest single win for the Core 3 201E comes in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 12613 against the i5-1335U's 8889.5, a 41.9% advantage. This is the most dramatic difference in the entire comparison and highlights the desktop chip's ability to sustain high clocks under load. The physics test in PassMark shows a similar trend, with the Core 3 201E scoring 1141 versus 837, a 36.3% margin that indicates stronger computational throughput in simulation-style workloads.

PassMark extended instructions give the Core 3 201E a 23% lead (11035 versus 8974), and find prime numbers shows an 18.8% advantage (57 versus 48). These results point to the desktop part's superior instruction handling and arithmetic efficiency. The Core 3 201E also wins data compression (164160 versus 159593, 2.9% higher), PassMark multithread (14839 versus 14281, 3.9%), and single-thread tests (3482 versus 3336, 4.4% in both PassMark single-thread and singlethread listings).

The i5-1335U's biggest win is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it scores 238 versus 179, a 24.8% margin that is surprising given the Core 3 201E's higher boost clock. The mobile chip also takes Cinebench R15 multi-core by 13.2% (1464 versus 1271), suggesting that older Cinebench versions favor its core configuration. In PassMark integer math, the i5-1335U leads by 14.3% (51244 versus 43894), and data encryption shows a 10.8% advantage (10009 versus 8931). Floating point math goes to the i5-1335U by 5.4% (35176 versus 33260), while random string sorting is nearly tied, with the i5-1335U ahead by just 0.9% (17953 versus 17783).

Cinebench R20 splits the difference: the Core 3 201E wins both multi-core (5297 versus 4935, 7.3%) and single-core (747 versus 696, 7.3%). The overall pattern shows the Core 3 201E winning modern, sustained workloads while the i5-1335U excels in older tests and specific math operations, making the choice dependent on the target application mix.