Intel Core 3 201TE vs Intel Processor N150 Comparison

The Verdict

The Intel Core 3 201TE and the Intel Processor N150 occupy opposite ends of Intel's active product stack, despite sharing the same core count and integrated graphics. The data indicates the Core 3 201TE is a desktop processor designed for sustained multi-threaded work, while the N150 is a mobile part aimed at efficiency and basic computing tasks.

The Core 3 201TE sits at the 50th percentile of all CPUs in the database, placing it squarely in the mid-range of recorded processors. The N150, at the 28th percentile, is firmly in entry-level territory. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded benchmark scores, but its specifications alone point to a significant performance gap. The N150's average benchmark score of 1025 places it within 0.2% of four rival processors: the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T, Intel Core i3-4340, AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, and Intel Core i7-5650U. These rivals all score between 1024 and 1027, showing the N150 is a tightly clustered performer among older mid-range parts.

Buyers should pick the Core 3 201TE if they need a desktop processor with high boost clocks, ample cache, and support for dual-channel DDR4 or DDR5 memory with ECC. The N150 suits users who prioritize low power draw in a mobile form factor, with its 6W TDP versus the Core 3 201TE's 45W TDP. The N150 also supports LPDDR5 memory, which the Core 3 201TE does not.

Architecture Differences

The Core 3 201TE uses the Bartlett Lake codename and belongs to the Core 3 generation. The N150 uses the Twin Lake architecture, which the database lists under the Alder Lake-N generation. Both processors are built on Intel's 10 nm process node and fabricated by Intel, but they diverge in core configuration and memory pathways.

The Core 3 201TE has 4 cores and 8 threads, indicating Hyper-Threading support. The N150 has 4 cores and 4 threads, meaning each core handles a single thread. This is a fundamental difference in parallel processing capability. The Core 3 201TE can handle twice as many concurrent threads as the N150, which directly impacts multi-threaded workloads like rendering or compilation.

Cache layouts differ substantially. The Core 3 201TE allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and a shared 12 MB L3 cache. The N150 uses 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Core 3 201TE's larger L3 cache (12 MB vs 6 MB) provides more capacity for frequently accessed data across all cores. The N150's larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations may help with single-thread latency, but the total cache footprint is smaller.

Memory architecture is a major dividing line. The Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 76.8 GB/s. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but uses a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. The Core 3 201TE has exactly double the memory bandwidth of the N150. The N150's LPDDR5 support is exclusive to it, which is typical for mobile parts that use soldered memory.

ECC memory support is exclusive to the Core 3 201TE. This feature matters for workstation or server use cases where data integrity is critical. The N150 does not support ECC.

PCIe connectivity is another differentiator. The Core 3 201TE provides PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the N150 offers PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The Core 3 201TE's PCIe Gen 5 support allows for faster data transfer to compatible GPUs and NVMe drives, and its 16 lanes is a standard desktop configuration. The N150's PCIe Gen 3 is several generations behind, which limits bandwidth for expansion devices.

Both processors integrate the same UHD Graphics 730 iGPU, so visual output capability is identical on paper.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no direct head-to-head benchmark results between the Core 3 201TE and the N150. However, the N150 has four recorded Cinebench scores, and the Core 3 201TE's specifications can be interpreted against those results.

The N150 scores 422.5 in Cinebench R15 multi-core and 153.15 in single-core. In Cinebench R23, it scores 2590.5 multi-core and 935 single-core. These numbers place the N150 at the 28th percentile overall. The Core 3 201TE has no recorded scores, but its 8 threads versus the N150's 4 threads suggests it would outperform the N150 in any multi-threaded test. The Core 3 201TE's boost clock of 4.60 GHz versus the N150's 3.60 GHz also indicates a substantial single-thread advantage, since both share the same 10 nm process and integrated graphics.

The N150's nearest rivals provide a useful anchor. It scores 0.1% above the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, and 0.1% below the Intel Core i3-4340 and 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-5650U. This means the N150 performs within a hair of these four processors, all of which are older desktop or mobile parts. The Core 3 201TE, with its higher clocks and double the threads, would sit well above this cluster, though no recorded measurement confirms this.

The single-channel memory bus on the N150 is a bottleneck for memory-intensive tasks. With 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, it delivers half the bandwidth of the Core 3 201TE's 76.8 GB/s. In benchmarks that scale with memory bandwidth, such as compression or database workloads, this gap would likely widen beyond what core count alone predicts.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Cores: 4 (both), but threads differ: 8 on the Core 3 201TE, 4 on the N150.
• Base clock: 2.90 GHz on the Core 3 201TE, 0.10 GHz on the N150.
• Boost clock: 4.60 GHz on the Core 3 201TE, 3.60 GHz on the N150.
• TDP: 45W on the Core 3 201TE, 6W on the N150.
• Socket: Intel Socket 1700 on the Core 3 201TE, Intel BGA 1264 on the N150.
• Codename: Bartlett Lake on the Core 3 201TE, Twin Lake on the N150.
• Generation: Core 3 (Bartlett Lake) on the Core 3 201TE, Intel Processor (Alder Lake-N) on the N150.
• Die size: 163 mm² on the Core 3 201TE, not recorded for the N150.
• L1 cache: 80 KB per core on the Core 3 201TE, 96 KB per core on the N150.
• L2 cache: 1.25 MB per core on the Core 3 201TE, 2 MB shared on the N150.
• L3 cache: 12 MB shared on the Core 3 201TE, 6 MB shared on the N150.
• Memory bus: Dual-channel on the Core 3 201TE, single-channel on the N150.
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s on the Core 3 201TE, 38.4 GB/s on the N150.
• ECC memory: Supported on the Core 3 201TE, not supported on the N150.
• PCIe: Gen 5 with 16 lanes on the Core 3 201TE, Gen 3 with 9 lanes on the N150.
• Market segment: Desktop on the Core 3 201TE, Mobile on the N150.
• Release date: 2025-01-12 for the Core 3 201TE, 2024-11-19 for the N150.
• Launch MSRP: $134 for the Core 3 201TE, not recorded for the N150.
• Part number: SRPKDQ5CK for the Core 3 201TE, SRPNR for the N150.

The base clock difference is striking: the N150 lists 0.10 GHz, which is an extremely low idle clock, while the Core 3 201TE starts at 2.90 GHz. This reflects the N150's power-saving design, where the processor can drop to a near-sleep state and only ramp up to 3.60 GHz under load.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more threads?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 8 threads, while the N150 has 4 threads. Both have 4 physical cores.

Q: Does the N150 support ECC memory?

A: No. ECC memory support is exclusive to the Core 3 201TE.

Q: What memory types does each processor support?

A: The Core 3 201TE supports DDR4 and DDR5. The N150 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The Core 3 201TE boosts to 4.60 GHz, while the N150 boosts to 3.60 GHz.

Q: What is the TDP difference?

A: The Core 3 201TE has a TDP of 45W, and the N150 has a TDP of 6W.

Q: Which processor has a larger L3 cache?

A: The Core 3 201TE has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, double the N150's 6 MB.

Q: What is the N150's average benchmark score relative to its nearest rivals?

A: The N150 scores 1025 on average, which is 0.1% above the AMD Phenom II X6 1075T and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2500U, 0.1% below the Intel Core i3-4340, and 0.2% below the Intel Core i7-5650U.

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core 3 201TE wins in:

• Multi-threaded workloads: 8 threads versus 4 threads on the N150. Any parallel task, from video encoding to 3D rendering, will benefit from the doubled thread count.
• Single-thread performance: The 4.60 GHz boost clock is 1.0 GHz higher than the N150's 3.60 GHz. The Core 3 201TE also starts at 2.90 GHz base, versus the N150's 0.10 GHz, meaning it sustains higher clocks even before boost kicks in.
• Memory bandwidth: 76.8 GB/s on a dual-channel bus, exactly double the N150's 38.4 GB/s. Workloads that stream large datasets will see a clear advantage.
• ECC reliability: The Core 3 201TE supports ECC memory, which the N150 does not. This is a decisive factor for error-sensitive computing.
• PCIe expansion: PCIe Gen 5 with 16 lanes provides far more bandwidth and lane count than the N150's PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes.
• Cache capacity: 12 MB of L3 cache versus 6 MB on the N150, which reduces memory traffic for frequently accessed data.

Intel Processor N150 wins in:

• Power efficiency: The 6W TDP is a fraction of the Core 3 201TE's 45W. This makes the N150 suitable for passively cooled or battery-powered devices.
• Memory flexibility: The N150 supports LPDDR5, which the Core 3 201TE does not. This is standard for mobile platforms with soldered memory.
• Mobile form factor: The BGA 1264 socket is designed for soldered, low-profile installations. The Core 3 201TE uses Socket 1700, which requires a desktop motherboard.
• Release timing: The N150 launched on 2024-11-19, earlier than the Core 3 201TE's 2025-01-12 release, though both are currently active.

The data shows a clear split: the Core 3 201TE is built for desktop performance and expandability, while the N150 is built for low-power mobile operation. Neither processor is a direct substitute for the other. The Core 3 201TE's lack of recorded benchmarks means its exact standing among rivals is unmeasured, but its specifications place it far above the N150's 28th percentile position. The N150's average score of 1025 places it within 0.2% of four older rivals, confirming its entry-level status.