Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core 5 330 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records no direct head-to-head benchmark comparisons between the Intel Core 3 201TE and the Intel Core 5 330. However, the available benchmark data for the Core 5 330 provides a substantial profile for analysis, while the Core 3 201TE currently has no recorded benchmark scores. This absence of direct comparison data means the analysis relies on the Core 5 330's absolute scores and its position among nearest rivals.

The Core 5 330 delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13150 and a single-core score of 1856. In Cinebench R20, it records 5523 multi-core and 779 single-core, while in the older R15 test it achieves 1325 multi-core and 186 single-core. These results indicate a strong multi-threaded performer relative to its single-thread capabilities, with the multi-core scores scaling well beyond what the single-core figures alone would predict.

PassMark results further characterize the Core 5 330. The multithread score sits at 15471, while single-thread performance reaches 4088. Data compression workloads yield 145287, data encryption scores 11076, and extended instructions (SIMD) hit 12808. Floating point math records 43885, integer math 33258, prime number finding 114, physics calculations 1201, and random string sorting 17771.

The Core 5 330's average benchmark score is 18345, placing it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-14100 with an average score of 18318 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core 7 360 at 18374 (0.2% ahead), the Intel Core i3-13100 at 18380 (0.2% ahead), and the Intel Core 3 305 at 18302 (0.2% behind). The Core 5 330 effectively sits in a tight cluster, with all four rivals within a 0.2% margin, indicating performance parity across this segment.

Since the Core 3 201TE lacks any recorded benchmark scores, the head-to-head comparison cannot be quantified. The database shows zero wins for both processors in direct tests, reflecting the absence of comparative data rather than a performance verdict.

Where Each One Wins

The Core 5 330 demonstrates clear strengths in multi-threaded workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 13150 indicates substantial parallel processing capability, likely benefiting from its configuration. The PassMark multithread score of 15471 reinforces this profile, and data compression at 145287 suggests strong throughput for tasks that utilize multiple execution units.

Single-thread performance for the Core 5 330 is also notable, with a PassMark single-thread score of 4088 and Cinebench R23 single-core at 1856. These figures place it competitively among its nearest rivals, all of which fall within a narrow 0.2% band of average scores. The Core 5 330's percentile rank of 72 indicates it outperforms the majority of CPUs in the database overall.

The Core 3 201TE has no benchmark data, so no wins can be attributed to it. Its specifications suggest a different design philosophy, but without recorded results, the database cannot confirm any workload-specific advantages. The Core 3 201TE features 4 cores and 8 threads, which could imply better multi-threading efficiency per core, but this remains speculative without measurements.

The Core 5 330's wins, based on available data, center on its measured performance across Cinebench and PassMark tests. The Core 3 201TE's wins, if any, are unrecorded. The data therefore favors the Core 5 330 solely because it has verifiable scores, while the Core 3 201TE has none.

Architecture Differences

The two processors diverge significantly in architecture. The Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and is built on a 10 nm process node, while the Core 5 330 employs the Wildcat Lake codename on a 3 nm node. This process difference likely contributes to efficiency and thermal characteristics, though the database does not specify performance-per-watt ratios.

Core configuration differs: the Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support, while the Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads, suggesting no simultaneous multi-threading. The Core 3 201TE's base clock is 2.90 GHz with a boost of 4.60 GHz, whereas the Core 5 330 has a lower base clock of 1.50 GHz but matches the 4.60 GHz boost. This suggests the Core 5 330 relies more on boost states for peak performance.

Cache layouts are distinct. The Core 3 201TE provides 80 KB L1 per core, 1.25 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Core 5 330 offers 192 KB L1, 2.5 MB L2, and 6 MB shared L3. The Core 3 201TE's larger L3 cache may benefit certain workloads, while the Core 5 330's smaller L3 could be offset by its newer process node.

Memory support differs substantially. The Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with dual-channel memory and 76.8 GB/s bandwidth, plus ECC memory support. The Core 5 330 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X but with single-channel memory and 59.7 GB/s bandwidth, and no ECC. The Core 3 201TE's dual-channel configuration provides higher theoretical memory throughput.

PCIe capabilities also diverge. The Core 3 201TE offers Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the Core 5 330 provides Gen 4 with 6 lanes (CPU only). This affects expansion options and data transfer rates for attached devices.

Integrated graphics differ, with the Core 3 201TE using UHD Graphics 730 and the Core 5 330 using Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The Xe3 architecture on the Core 5 330 represents a newer graphics design, likely improving media and display capabilities.

Thermal design power (TDP) shows a notable contrast: the Core 3 201TE is rated at 45 W, while the Core 5 330 is rated at 15 W. The Core 5 330's lower TDP aligns with its mobile market segment, whereas the Core 3 201TE targets desktop use.

Socket types differ completely. The Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, typical for desktop platforms, while the Core 5 330 uses Intel BGA 1516, indicating a soldered mobile package. This means the Core 5 330 is not upgradeable or replaceable in typical systems.

Release dates show a gap, with the Core 3 201TE launching on 2025-01-12 and the Core 5 330 on 2026-04-15. The Core 5 330's later release aligns with its more advanced process node and newer architecture.

The Verdict

The data supports the Core 5 330 as the measured performer, with a 72nd percentile ranking and an average benchmark score of 18345. Its nearest rivals all sit within 0.2%, confirming that it delivers competitive performance in its class. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmarks, making any performance claim impossible from the database.

For multi-threaded workloads, the Core 5 330's Cinebench R23 score of 13150 and PassMark multithread score of 15471 indicate strong capability. Its single-thread performance, with a PassMark score of 4088, also holds up well. The Core 3 201TE's 8 threads versus the Core 5 330's 6 could theoretically help in heavily threaded tasks, but without scores, this is unverified.

The Core 3 201TE's advantages lie in specifications: dual-channel memory with higher bandwidth (76.8 GB/s versus 59.7 GB/s), ECC support, a larger L3 cache (12 MB versus 6 MB), and PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes versus Gen 4 with 6 lanes. These features favor desktop workloads requiring memory bandwidth, reliability (ECC), or high-speed expansion.

The Core 5 330's advantages include a more advanced 3 nm process, lower TDP (15 W versus 45 W), newer Xe3 graphics, and a later release date. Its single-channel memory and BGA socket limit its application to mobile or compact systems.

The verdict from the data: the Core 5 330 is the only one with proven performance, and it performs competitively among its peers. The Core 3 201TE offers a broader feature set for desktop use, but its lack of benchmark scores leaves its performance unquantified. Users requiring verified performance should look at the Core 5 330; those needing desktop-specific features like ECC and PCIe Gen 5 must consider the Core 3 201TE despite the missing data.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 5 330 has an average benchmark score of 18345. The Intel Core 3 201TE has no recorded average benchmark score (0 in the database).

Q: How does the Core 5 330 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Core 5 330 scores 0.1% higher than the Intel Core i3-14100 and the Intel Core 3 305, and 0.2% lower than the Intel Core 7 360 and the Intel Core i3-13100.

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

A: The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Core 5 330 has 6 cores and 6 threads.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory (true). The Core 5 330 does not support ECC memory (false).

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 W. The Core 5 330 has a TDP of 15 W.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Core 5 330 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 3 201TE | Intel Core 5 330 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 6 |

| Threads | 8 | 6 |

| Base Clock | 2.90 GHz | 1.50 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 4.60 GHz | 4.60 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Intel BGA 1516 |

| Codename | Bartlett Lake | Wildcat Lake |

| Process Node | 10 nm | 3 nm |

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

| L2 Cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 2.5 MB |

| L3 Cache | 12 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4, DDR5 | DDR5, LPDDR5X |

| Memory Bus | Dual-channel | Single-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | 76.8 GB/s | 59.7 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | Yes | No |

| PCIe | Gen 5, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 6 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 730 | Intel Xe3 Graphics (2 Xe) |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release Date | 2025-01-12 | 2026-04-15 |

| Launch MSRP | $134 | $309 |

| Part Number | SRPKDQ5CK | SAE3G |

| Percentile vs All CPUs | 50 | 72 |

| Avg Benchmark Score | 0 | 18345 |