CPU Comparison
Intel Core 3 201E
Core i7-10700
PERFORMANCE BENCHMARKS
Analysis: Intel Core 3 201E vs Intel Core i7-10700
The Intel Core i7-10700 and the Intel Core 3 201E are two desktop processors that land in the same performance tier despite coming from different eras. The data shows the Core 3 201E wins 11 of 17 head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Core i7-10700 takes 6. However, the average benchmark scores are nearly identical, with the Core 3 201E at 19056 and the Core i7-10700 at 19145, a delta of just 0.5% in favor of the older chip. Both sit at the 73rd percentile of all CPUs. The Core 3 201E is the clear choice for users prioritizing modern architecture, single-threaded speed, and encryption workloads. The Core i7-10700 remains relevant for multi-threaded integer math, data compression, and extended instruction workloads, where its extra cores and threads provide a measurable advantage.
The Verdict
The benchmark data paints a clear picture for different use cases. Pick the Intel Core 3 201E if you need the fastest single-core performance and modern platform features. It beats the Core i7-10700 by 17% in PassMark single-thread tests (3482 vs 2891) and by 13.5% in Cinebench R23 single-core (1780 vs 1540). Its lead extends to Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 12613 versus 10910, a 13.5% advantage. This makes it the better choice for lightly-threaded applications, everyday responsiveness, and any workload that relies on a few fast cores rather than many slower ones.
Pick the Intel Core i7-10700 if your workloads are heavily multi-threaded and involve data compression or math operations. It wins PassMark data compression by 53.6% (252113 vs 164160), integer math by 43.5% (62988 vs 43894), and extended instructions by 46.4% (16160 vs 11035). Its 8 cores and 16 threads give it a 8.9% win in PassMark multi-thread (16161 vs 14839), which is notable given the Core 3 201E's newer architecture. If you run compression tools, code compilation, or spreadsheet-style integer calculations, the older chip's core count wins.
The Core 3 201E is the more balanced processor for most users. It wins the majority of tests, including all Cinebench versions and PassMark physics by 30.4% (1141 vs 794). Its 10 nm process node and DDR5 memory support make it a more future-proof platform choice. The Core i7-10700 is a specialist tool that excels in specific multi-threaded scenarios but falls behind in nearly every other measure.
Architecture Differences
The two processors come from different architectural lineages. The Intel Core i7-10700 uses Comet Lake, built on Intel's 14 nm process node, and belongs to the Core 10th Gen series. The Intel Core 3 201E uses the Bartlett Lake codename, built on a 10 nm process node, and belongs to the Core 3 generation. This process node difference is a primary driver of their performance characteristics: the newer 10 nm node allows for lower power consumption and higher efficiency, while the 14 nm node relies on higher core counts to compete.
Core counts differ substantially. The Core i7-10700 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. Despite having half the cores, the Core 3 201E matches or beats the i7-10700 in most benchmarks, demonstrating the efficiency of its newer architecture. The cache layouts also differ: the i7-10700 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, with 16 MB of shared L3. The Core 3 201E has larger per-core caches at 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2, but a smaller 12 MB shared L3.
Memory support diverges significantly. The i7-10700 supports only DDR4 with dual-channel memory and a maximum bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s. The Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, also dual-channel, but with a higher maximum bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The Core 3 201E also supports ECC memory, a feature absent from the i7-10700. PCIe connectivity differs as well: the i7-10700 provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the Core 3 201E provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes. The integrated graphics also differ, with the i7-10700 featuring UHD Graphics 630 and the Core 3 201E featuring UHD Graphics 730.
The Core 3 201E has a die size of 163 mm², while the i7-10700's die size is not listed. Both processors have their base and boost clocks at different points: the i7-10700 has a 2.90 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost, while the Core 3 201E has a 3.60 GHz base and 4.80 GHz boost. The higher base clock of the Core 3 201E contributes to its single-thread advantage.
Head-to-Head Benchmarks
The most significant wins for the Intel Core 3 201E come in Cinebench tests across the board. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 1271 versus 1099 for the i7-10700, a 13.5% difference. The same 13.5% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multi-core (5297 vs 4582) and Cinebench R23 multi-core (12613 vs 10910). Single-core Cinebench results show the same pattern: R15 at 179 vs 155, R20 at 747 vs 646, and R23 at 1780 vs 1540, each a 13.5% lead for the Core 3 201E. This consistency suggests the architectural advantage is uniform across workloads.
The Core 3 201E also wins decisively in PassMark physics, scoring 1141 versus 794, a 30.4% advantage. PassMark data encryption shows a 39.8% lead for the Core 3 201E (8931 vs 5379), indicating superior cryptographic performance. PassMark find prime numbers goes to the Core 3 201E at 57 vs 47, a 17.5% win. PassMark single-thread and singlethread tests both show a 17% lead (3482 vs 2891).
The Intel Core i7-10700 wins its tests by larger margins. PassMark data compression is its biggest win at 53.6% (252113 vs 164160). PassMark random string sorting shows a 77.6% advantage (31585 vs 17783), the largest delta in the entire benchmark set. PassMark extended instructions come in at 46.4% (16160 vs 11035), and PassMark integer math at 43.5% (62988 vs 43894). PassMark floating point math shows a 16.7% win (38823 vs 33260). The i7-10700 also wins PassMark multi-thread by 8.9% (16161 vs 14839), a smaller margin than its other wins but still meaningful.
The data reveals a pattern: the Core 3 201E wins on efficiency-oriented and single-threaded tasks, while the i7-10700 wins on raw throughput tasks that scale with core count. The i7-10700's 8-core advantage shows most clearly in compression and sorting, which are inherently parallel. The Core 3 201E's newer architecture compensates for fewer cores in most other tests.
Specification Differences
The two processors differ across nearly every specification category. The Intel Core i7-10700 has 8 cores and 16 threads, while the Intel Core 3 201E has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks differ: 2.90 GHz for the i7-10700 versus 3.60 GHz for the Core 3 201E. Both have matching boost clocks at 4.80 GHz. TDP is slightly different, with the i7-10700 at 65W and the Core 3 201E at 60W.
Socket compatibility is different: the i7-10700 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700. Process nodes differ at 14 nm versus 10 nm. The Core 3 201E has a listed die size of 163 mm², while the i7-10700 does not have a listed die size. Cache configurations differ: the i7-10700 has 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core with 16 MB shared L3, while the Core 3 201E has 80 KB L1 and 1.25 MB L2 per core with 12 MB shared L3.
Memory support is a major differentiator. The i7-10700 supports only DDR4, while the Core 3 201E supports DDR4 and DDR5. Memory bandwidth is 46.9 GB/s for the i7-10700 versus 76.8 GB/s for the Core 3 201E. ECC memory support is present on the Core 3 201E but absent on the i7-10700. PCIe generations differ: Gen 3 for the i7-10700 versus Gen 5 for the Core 3 201E, both with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics differ: UHD Graphics 630 for the i7-10700 versus UHD Graphics 730 for the Core 3 201E.
Release dates are far apart: the i7-10700 released on 2020-04-29, while the Core 3 201E released on 2025-01-12. The Core 3 201E has a launch MSRP of $134. The i7-10700 has no listed launch MSRP. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. Part numbers are SRH6Y for the i7-10700 and SRVTR for the Core 3 201E.
FAQ
Q: Which processor has better single-core performance?
A: The Intel Core 3 201E wins all single-core tests. It scores 3482 in PassMark single-thread versus 2891 for the i7-10700, a 17% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1780 versus 1540, a 13.5% lead.
Q: Does the Core i7-10700's higher core count matter?
A: Yes, but only in specific workloads. The i7-10700 wins PassMark multi-thread by 8.9% (16161 vs 14839) and dominates data compression by 53.6% (252113 vs 164160). However, the Core 3 201E still wins Cinebench R23 multi-core by 13.5% despite having half the cores.
Q: Can the Core 3 201E use DDR5 memory?
A: Yes. The Core 3 201E supports both DDR4 and DDR5, while the i7-10700 supports only DDR4. The Core 3 201E also has higher memory bandwidth at 76.8 GB/s versus 46.9 GB/s.
Q: Which processor is better for encryption workloads?
A: The Core 3 201E is significantly better. It scores 8931 in PassMark data encryption versus 5379 for the i7-10700, a 39.8% advantage.
Q: Are these processors on the same socket?
A: No. The i7-10700 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the Core 3 201E uses Intel Socket 1700. They are not interchangeable.
Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?
A: The i7-10700 has 16 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core 3 201E has 12 MB. However, the Core 3 201E has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches.
Where Each One Wins
The Intel Core 3 201E wins in scenarios that favor newer architecture and higher clock speeds. It is the better choice for single-threaded applications, where its 17% PassMark single-thread lead matters. Physics simulation favors it by 30.4%, making it suitable for entry-level physics calculations. Encryption tasks are a clear win at 39.8%, so any workload involving security, hashing, or secure communications benefits. Its Cinebench wins across all versions indicate strong rendering performance despite fewer cores. The Core 3 201E also supports DDR5 and ECC memory, making it suitable for memory-sensitive or reliability-focused builds. Its PCIe Gen 5 support provides future-proofing for high-bandwidth peripherals.
The Intel Core i7-10700 wins in scenarios that reward raw core count and parallel execution. Data compression is its strongest category at 53.6% ahead, making it ideal for file archiving, backup tools, and database workloads. Random string sorting shows a 77.6% advantage, indicating strength in sorting algorithms and data processing pipelines. Extended instructions at 46.4% and integer math at 43.5% suggest advantages in scientific computing, financial modeling, and code compilation. Floating point math at 16.7% shows moderate superiority in graphics calculations and simulations. Its 8.9% multi-thread win makes it competitive for heavily-threaded general workloads, though the margin is smaller than its other wins. The i7-10700 remains a viable choice for users already on Socket 1200 platforms who want to maximize existing hardware investment without upgrading the motherboard.