Intel Core 3 N350 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains a full benchmark profile for the Intel Core 3 N350, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has no recorded benchmark scores. Consequently, a direct numeric comparison is impossible for any of the standard test suites. The Intel part shows a complete set of Cinebench and PassMark results, whereas the Qualcomm entry lists no scores for any test.

For the Intel Core 3 N350, the recorded data shows a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 6274 and a single-core score of 885. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core score is 2635 and the single-core score is 371. Cinebench R15 results show a multi-core score of 632 and a single-core score of 89. These figures indicate a substantial gap between multi-threaded and single-threaded performance, with the multi-core score being roughly seven times the single-core score in R23.

PassMark results for the Intel chip include a multi-thread score of 7382 and a single-thread score of 1974. The integer math score is 27669, while floating-point math reaches 17781. Data compression scores 80444, and data encryption scores 5693. Extended instructions score 3981, and find prime numbers scores 20. Random string sorting scores 10102, and physics scores 446.

The average benchmark score for the Intel Core 3 N350 is 9903. Its percentile ranking against all CPUs is 66. The nearest rivals in the database include the Intel Core i7-3770 with an average score of 9706, which is 2% lower. The Intel Core i5-1035G1 scores 9684, also 2.3% lower. The AMD EPYC 7F52 scores 10159, which is 2.5% higher, and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 scores 10230, which is 3.2% higher. This places the N350 in a narrow band where it trails two server-class processors by small margins but leads two older mobile and desktop parts by similar margins.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile of 50, with no nearest rivals listed. The absence of data means no head-to-head wins can be assigned to either processor. The head-to-head benchmark array is empty, and both win counters show zero.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 N350 demonstrates measurable strengths across every benchmark category where data exists. Its PassMark multi-thread score of 7382, combined with a single-thread score of 1974, suggests balanced throughput for workloads that use multiple cores. The integer math score of 27669 is higher than the floating-point math score of 17781, which indicates a performance profile suited to general computation rather than heavy numerical simulation.

Data compression at 80444 is the highest PassMark sub-score recorded for this chip, more than double the integer math result. This points to strong performance in file archiving and data transfer tasks. Data encryption at 5693 is comparatively modest, suggesting the chip handles encryption workloads adequately but not exceptionally. Extended instructions at 3981 and random string sorting at 10102 round out the picture, showing reasonable capability in string manipulation and specialized instruction sets.

The physics score of 446 is the lowest PassMark sub-score, indicating limited headroom for physics simulation or gaming workloads that rely on rigid body dynamics. The find prime numbers score of 20 is likewise low, which is typical for a processor with a modest single-core clock. The base clock of 0.10 GHz and boost clock of 3.90 GHz explain this pattern: the chip can reach a high boost frequency but operates at a very low base frequency, likely to conserve power.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has no benchmark scores in the database, so no wins can be attributed to it. Its specifications, however, suggest a different performance envelope. The chip has 12 cores and 12 threads, compared to the Intel's 8 cores and 8 threads. Its base clock is 3.40 GHz, which is much higher than the Intel's 0.10 GHz base clock, though no boost clock is recorded for the Qualcomm part. The Qualcomm chip also has a TDP of 35, five times the Intel's 7 TDP, which implies higher sustained performance but also higher power draw.

Memory bandwidth shows a significant difference. The Qualcomm part supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s. The Intel part supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory but uses a single-channel bus with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. This gives the Qualcomm chip a 3.5 times memory bandwidth advantage, which impacts all memory-bound workloads.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 N350 uses the Twin Lake architecture, part of the Core 3 generation built on the Alder Lake-N family. It is fabricated on a 10 nm process at Intel's own foundry. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 uses the Oryon codename, part of the Snapdragon X Elite generation, and is fabricated on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The smaller process node gives the Qualcomm part a manufacturing advantage in terms of transistor density and power efficiency per transistor.

Cache hierarchies differ substantially. The Intel chip has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm chip has 288 KB of L1 cache per core, 12 MB of L2 cache per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part has three times the L1 cache per core and six times the L2 cache per module, which likely reduces memory latency for frequently accessed data. The L3 cache is identical at 6 MB shared.

The core counts differ as well. The Intel part has 8 cores and 8 threads, meaning no hyper-threading. The Qualcomm part has 12 cores and 12 threads, also without hyper-threading. The Qualcomm chip has 50% more physical cores, which should improve multi-threaded performance in workloads that scale with core count.

Process node and foundry differences are stark. Intel uses its own 10 nm process, while Qualcomm uses TSMC's 4 nm process. The 4 nm node is more advanced, enabling higher clock speeds at lower power per transistor. The Qualcomm base clock of 3.40 GHz reflects this, while the Intel base clock of 0.10 GHz is exceptionally low, likely for idle power savings.

PCIe support differs: the Intel part uses Gen 3 with 9 lanes, while the Qualcomm part uses Gen 4 with 12 lanes. This gives the Qualcomm chip more bandwidth for external devices and newer connectivity standards. The integrated graphics also differ: Intel uses UHD Graphics 770, while Qualcomm uses Adreno X1-85. Neither has benchmark data in the database.

Memory support shows a clear divergence. The Intel chip supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5, but only on a single-channel bus. The Qualcomm chip supports only LPDDR5X, but on a dual-channel bus. The memory bandwidth difference of 38.4 GB/s versus 135.2 GB/s is a major architectural distinction. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

The socket types are different: Intel BGA 1264 for the Intel part and Qualcomm BGA 2073 for the Qualcomm part. Both are ball-grid array packages for mobile use. The release dates are close: the Intel part released on 2025-01-06, and the Qualcomm part released on 2024-04-23, roughly nine months earlier.

The Verdict

The data in the database provides a complete picture for the Intel Core 3 N350 and no benchmark picture for the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100. For any workload measured by Cinebench or PassMark, only the Intel chip has recorded scores. The Intel chip's average benchmark score of 9903 places it in the 66th percentile of all CPUs, ahead of the Intel Core i7-3770 by 2% and the Intel Core i5-1035G1 by 2.3%, while trailing the AMD EPYC 7F52 by 2.5% and the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 by 3.2%.

For users selecting based on measured performance, the Intel Core 3 N350 is the only option with verified data. Its single-thread score of 885 in Cinebench R23 and multi-thread score of 6274 indicate a processor capable of everyday tasks and moderate multi-threaded workloads. The low base clock of 0.10 GHz and TDP of 7 suggest a power-efficient design that boosts to 3.90 GHz when needed.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 offers architectural advantages on paper: more cores (12 vs 8), more L1 and L2 cache, a smaller 4 nm process node, dual-channel memory with higher bandwidth (135.2 GB/s vs 38.4 GB/s), and PCIe Gen 4. These specifications point to potentially higher performance in memory-bound and multi-threaded workloads. However, without any benchmark scores in the database, these advantages remain theoretical.

The decision depends on whether the user prioritizes verified performance or architectural potential. The Intel part has a measured track record across 17 benchmark tests. The Qualcomm part has none. The Intel part also has a much lower TDP of 7 versus 35, which matters for battery life in mobile devices. The Qualcomm part's higher memory bandwidth and core count suggest it could outperform the Intel chip in sustained multi-threaded tasks, but the database does not confirm this.

FAQ

Q: Does the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 have any benchmark scores in the database?

A: No. The database lists no benchmark results for the Qualcomm part, giving it an average benchmark score of 0 and no nearest rivals.

Q: What is the Intel Core 3 N350's best Cinebench score?

A: The highest Cinebench score for the Intel part is 6274 in the R23 multi-core test. Its R23 single-core score is 885.

Q: How does the Intel Core 3 N350 compare to its nearest rivals?

A: The Intel part scores 9903 on average, which is 2% higher than the Intel Core i7-3770 (9706), 2.3% higher than the Intel Core i5-1035G1 (9684), 2.5% lower than the AMD EPYC 7F52 (10159), and 3.2% lower than the Intel Xeon Platinum 8280 (10230).

Q: What memory bandwidth does each processor support?

A: The Intel Core 3 N350 supports 38.4 GB/s on a single-channel bus. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 supports 135.2 GB/s on a dual-channel bus.

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

A: The Intel Core 3 N350 has 8 cores and 8 threads. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has 12 cores and 12 threads.

Q: Which processor has a higher TDP?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-78-100 has a TDP of 35, which is five times higher than the Intel Core 3 N350's TDP of 7.