Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Core 7 360 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 7 360 holds every recorded benchmark advantage in this comparison. The database contains no benchmark scores for the Intel Core 3 201TE, so all performance figures below reference the Core 7 360 exclusively. Its average benchmark score of 18,374 places it at the 72nd percentile among all CPUs, a strong position that reflects consistent output across single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

In Cinebench R23, the Core 7 360 delivers a multi-core score of 13,634 and a single-core score of 1,924. These numbers indicate a processor that can handle both heavily threaded rendering tasks and lightly threaded responsiveness with similar competence. The multi-core result is roughly seven times the single-core figure, which is typical for a six-thread part with modest per-core resources.

Cinebench R20 results follow the same pattern: multi-core at 5,726 and single-core at 808. The ratio between these scores is nearly identical to R23, confirming that the scaling behavior remains stable across different versions of the workload. Cinebench R15 shows 1,374 multi-core and 193 single-core, again preserving the same approximate ratio.

PassMark tests add further detail. The single-thread score sits at 4,274, while the multithread score is 15,544. Integer math reaches 34,238, floating-point math reaches 44,963, and extended instructions (SIMD-heavy workloads) score 12,390. Data compression posts 142,877, data encryption posts 11,164, and random string sorting reaches 17,636. Physics simulation scores 1,213, and prime number finding scores 120.

The nearest rivals in the database provide context for these numbers. The Intel Core i3-13100 averages 18,380, which is essentially identical to the Core 7 360, with a delta of 0 percent. The Intel Core 5 330 trails by 0.2 percent at 18,345. The Intel Core i3-14100 sits 0.3 percent behind at 18,318, and the Intel Core 3 305 is 0.4 percent behind at 18,302. These deltas are small, indicating that the Core 7 360 performs in a tight cluster with several recent desktop parts, despite being a mobile processor.

The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmarks and no nearest rivals in the database. Its percentile rank of 50 is a neutral midpoint, but without measured scores it cannot be positioned against the Core 7 360 or any other chip. The data simply shows that one processor has extensive benchmark coverage while the other has none.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 boosts to 4.80 GHz, while the Intel Core 3 201TE boosts to 4.60 GHz.

Q: Which processor uses more power?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Intel Core 7 360 has a TDP of 15 watts.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads. The Core 3 201TE supports hyper-threading, giving it more threads than cores, while the Core 7 360 has equal core and thread counts.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory. The Intel Core 7 360 supports DDR5 and LPDDR5X memory.

Q: Which processor has the larger L3 cache?

A: The Intel Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel Core 7 360 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache.

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core 7 360 has an average benchmark score of 18,374. The Intel Core 3 201TE has an average benchmark score of 0, meaning no benchmark data exists in the database.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel design families and target different market segments. The Intel Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry, with a die size of 163 mm². The Intel Core 7 360 uses the Wildcat Lake codename and belongs to the Core 5 generation according to its generation field, though its name suggests a higher tier. It is built on a 3 nm process node, also at Intel's foundry, and its die size is not recorded.

Core counts differ meaningfully. The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating simultaneous multi-threading. The Core 7 360 has 6 cores and 6 threads, with no multi-threading. The Core 7 360 therefore has more physical cores but fewer logical threads. Its base clock is much lower at 1.50 GHz versus 2.90 GHz for the Core 3 201TE, but its boost clock is higher at 4.80 GHz versus 4.60 GHz.

Cache layouts diverge sharply. The Core 3 201TE provides 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Core 7 360 provides 192 KB of L1 per core, 2.5 MB of L2 per core, but only 6 MB of shared L3. Per-core L1 and L2 capacities are larger on the Core 7 360, but the total L3 pool is half the size.

Memory interfaces differ by design. The Core 3 201TE uses dual-channel memory with a bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s, supporting DDR4 and DDR5. The Core 7 360 uses single-channel memory with a bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, supporting DDR5 and LPDDR5X. The desktop part has higher peak bandwidth and broader memory compatibility, while the mobile part is limited to a single-channel path and newer memory types only.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Core 3 201TE offers PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes from the CPU. The Core 7 360 offers PCIe Gen 4 with 6 lanes. The desktop chip has more lanes and a newer generation, enabling faster expansion devices and more of them. The mobile chip is constrained to fewer lanes and an older generation.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Core 3 201TE uses UHD Graphics 730. The Core 7 360 uses Intel Xe3 Graphics with 2 Xe cores. The mobile part's graphics are newer architecture, but the desktop part's graphics are the only option in its socket class.

ECC memory support is present on the Core 3 201TE and absent on the Core 7 360. The socket types are incompatible: the Core 3 201TE uses Intel Socket 1700, while the Core 7 360 uses Intel BGA 1516. The former is a desktop socket, the latter is a mobile ball grid array package. Neither multiplier is unlocked, so overclocking is not possible on either chip.

The Verdict

The benchmark data points decisively toward the Intel Core 7 360 for measured performance. Its average score of 18,374 and 72nd percentile ranking are backed by 17 individual benchmark results. The Intel Core 3 201TE has no recorded scores, so any claim about its performance would be unsupported by the database. Users who require measured performance data should choose the Core 7 360 based on what is recorded.

The Core 7 360's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-13100, Core 5 330, Core i3-14100, and Core 3 305, all of which score within 0.4 percent. This indicates that the Core 7 360 trades blows with several established desktop chips, despite being a mobile processor with a 15 watt TDP. The efficiency advantage is substantial: the Core 7 360 draws 15 watts while delivering scores comparable to desktop parts that typically consume far more.

The Core 3 201TE offers features that the Core 7 360 lacks: dual-channel memory, higher memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5, a larger L3 cache, and a higher base clock. It also supports DDR4, which may matter for systems with existing memory. However, none of these features translate into recorded benchmark wins because no benchmarks exist for this processor.

The launch MSRP for the Core 3 201TE is $134. The launch MSRP for the Core 7 360 is $426. The price difference is large, but the benchmark gap cannot be quantified because the cheaper part has no scores. The database only shows that the Core 7 360 performs at a level comparable to several desktop i3-class chips, while the Core 3 201TE remains an unknown quantity.

For users with access to the Core 3 201TE's socket and memory requirements, the absence of benchmark data means they must rely on specifications alone. For users considering the Core 7 360, the recorded data shows a capable mobile processor that competes with desktop parts in the same score range.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across every major specification field recorded in the database.

• Cores: 4 (Core 3 201TE) versus 6 (Core 7 360)
• Threads: 8 (Core 3 201TE) versus 6 (Core 7 360)
• Base Clock: 2.90 GHz (Core 3 201TE) versus 1.50 GHz (Core 7 360)
• Boost Clock: 4.60 GHz (Core 3 201TE) versus 4.80 GHz (Core 7 360)
• TDP: 45 watts (Core 3 201TE) versus 15 watts (Core 7 360)
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 (Core 3 201TE) versus Intel BGA 1516 (Core 7 360)
• Codename: Bartlett Lake (Core 3 201TE) versus Wildcat Lake (Core 7 360)
• Process Node: 10 nm (Core 3 201TE) versus 3 nm (Core 7 360)
• Die Size: 163 mm² (Core 3 201TE) versus not recorded (Core 7 360)
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core (Core 3 201TE) versus 192 KB per core (Core 7 360)
• L2 Cache: 1.25 MB per core (Core 3 201TE) versus 2.5 MB per core (Core 7 360)
• L3 Cache: 12 MB shared (Core 3 201TE) versus 6 MB shared (Core 7 360)
• Memory Support: DDR4, DDR5 (Core 3 201TE) versus DDR5, LPDDR5X (Core 7 360)
• Memory Bus: Dual-channel (Core 3 201TE) versus Single-channel (Core 7 360)
• Memory Bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s (Core 3 201TE) versus 59.7 GB/s (Core 7 360)
• ECC Memory: Supported (Core 3 201TE) versus not supported (Core 7 360)
• PCIe: Gen 5, 16 lanes (Core 3 201TE) versus Gen 4, 6 lanes (Core 7 360)
• Integrated Graphics: UHD Graphics 730 (Core 3 201TE) versus Intel Xe3 Graphics, 2 Xe (Core 7 360)
• Market Segment: Desktop (Core 3 201TE) versus Mobile (Core 7 360)
• Release Date: 2025-01-12 (Core 3 201TE) versus 2026-04-15 (Core 7 360)
• Launch MSRP: $134 (Core 3 201TE) versus $426 (Core 7 360)
• Part Number: SRPKDQ5CK (Core 3 201TE) versus SAE3E (Core 7 360)
• Percentile: 50 (Core 3 201TE) versus 72 (Core 7 360)
• Average Benchmark Score: 0 (Core 3 201TE) versus 18,374 (Core 7 360)

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 360 wins in every category where measured data exists. Its benchmark scores span Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, plus seven PassMark subtests covering integer math, floating-point math, extended instructions, data compression, data encryption, random string sorting, physics, prime number finding, single-thread, and multithread workloads. The nearest rival comparisons show parity with the Intel Core i3-13100 (0 percent delta), and slight leads over the Core 5 330 (0.2 percent), Core i3-14100 (0.3 percent), and Core 3 305 (0.4 percent). For any workload represented in the database, the Core 7 360 delivers a recorded score that places it in the top quartile of all CPUs.

The Core 3 201TE wins only in specification comparisons. It has a higher base clock, more threads, more L3 cache, dual-channel memory, higher memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe Gen 5 support, DDR4 compatibility, a larger die, and a lower launch MSRP. These features may benefit specific use cases: ECC memory for error-sensitive workloads, dual-channel bandwidth for memory-bound tasks, and DDR4 support for systems with existing memory. The 163 mm² die size suggests a simpler design, while the 45 watt TDP indicates higher power draw than the Core 7 360's 15 watts.

The Core 7 360 wins on efficiency, process node, per-core cache, boost clock, integrated graphics architecture, and all recorded performance metrics. Its 3 nm process node is two generations ahead of the 10 nm node on the Core 3 201TE. Its per-core L1 and L2 caches are more than double the size. Its boost clock is 0.20 GHz higher. Its Xe3 graphics represent a newer generation than UHD Graphics 730.

The database makes clear that the Core 7 360 is the only one of the two with measurable performance, and that performance is strong for its class. The Core 3 201TE remains a specification sheet without a benchmark record. Any purchasing decision between these two parts would require the user to weigh unrecorded potential against recorded results. The data supports the Core 7 360 for anyone who needs verified performance numbers.