Intel Core 3 N355 vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 Comparison

The Intel Core 3 N355 and Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 are both eight-core mobile processors, but they target different segments of the computing market. The Core 3 N355 comes from Intel’s Twin Lake architecture, built on a 10 nm process, while the Snapdragon X1P-26-100 uses Qualcomm’s Oryon cores on a 4 nm process from TSMC. The database contains a full set of benchmark results for the Intel part, while the Qualcomm part has no recorded benchmark scores. This creates an asymmetric comparison, but the specification sheets and architectural details still allow for a meaningful analysis of their intended roles.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 3 N355 wins in any scenario where software relies on x86 compatibility, mature driver support, or a wide ecosystem of existing applications. Its benchmark scores place it in the 68th percentile among all CPUs tracked in the database, with an average benchmark score of 13492. That places it directly alongside desktop and older mobile parts like the Intel Core i3-12100F (average score 13494) and Intel Core i5-9500 (average score 13452). For everyday productivity, web browsing, office suites, and light content creation, the N355 has the measured performance to handle those workloads without strain. Its single-thread score of 2153 in PassMark indicates solid responsiveness for typical interactive tasks.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 wins in scenarios where power efficiency and platform integration matter more than raw legacy compatibility. Its 4 nm process node from TSMC gives it a manufacturing advantage over Intel’s 10 nm process, which typically translates to lower power draw for the same level of work. The Snapdragon also supports LPDDR5X memory with a dual-channel bus and 135.2 GB/s of memory bandwidth, which is more than three times the 38.4 GB/s available to the Intel part. That memory bandwidth advantage makes the Qualcomm part better suited for memory-intensive workloads such as large data set processing, AI inference on the CPU, or multitasking with many open applications. The Snapdragon also has 12 MB of L2 cache per module, dwarfing the 2 MB shared L2 cache on the Intel chip, which helps in workloads that repeatedly access the same data.

The Intel part wins in upgrade and compatibility scenarios due to its Intel BGA 1264 socket and support for DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory types. The Snapdragon uses Qualcomm BGA 2073 and only supports LPDDR5X, which limits system designers to soldered memory configurations. For users who need to run Windows applications that have not been ported to ARM, the Intel part is the safer choice. For users who prioritize battery life in thin-and-light laptops, the Snapdragon’s process advantage and lower power design philosophy give it the edge, though the database does not include direct power consumption measurements for either chip.

FAQ

Q: Does the Intel Core 3 N355 have benchmark results in the database?

A: Yes, the Intel Core 3 N355 has a full set of recorded benchmark scores, including Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests, plus multiple PassMark workloads. Its average benchmark score is 13492, and it sits in the 68th percentile among all CPUs.

Q: Does the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 have any benchmark results?

A: No, the database contains no benchmark scores for the Snapdragon X1P-26-100. Its average benchmark score is listed as zero, and its percentile rank is 50. This means direct measured performance comparisons cannot be made from recorded data.

Q: Which processor has higher memory bandwidth?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 supports LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus with 135.2 GB/s of bandwidth. The Intel Core 3 N355 supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Qualcomm part offers roughly 3.5 times the memory bandwidth.

Q: What are the process node differences between the two?

A: The Intel Core 3 N355 is built on Intel’s 10 nm process at Intel’s foundry. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 is built on TSMC’s 4 nm process. The smaller process node gives the Snapdragon a potential efficiency advantage, though the database does not include direct power measurements.

Q: How do the cache configurations compare?

A: The Intel part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part 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 significantly more L1 and L2 cache.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock speed?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The Qualcomm part does not have a listed boost clock in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database does not include any head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Core 3 N355 and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100. The head-to-head result count is zero for both processors, and there are no recorded win totals for either side. This means any performance comparison must rely on the Intel part’s absolute scores and the Qualcomm part’s architectural specifications rather than direct measured differences.

The Intel Core 3 N355 delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5262 and a single-core score of 1039. In Cinebench R20, it scores 3612 multi-core and 509 single-core. In Cinebench R15, it scores 822 multi-core and 168 single-core. These numbers show a processor that scales reasonably well across rendering workloads, with multi-core performance roughly five times its single-core performance in R23. The PassMark results reinforce this pattern: multithread score of 10174, single-thread score of 2153, integer math at 33894, floating point math at 22695, and extended instructions at 5968. Data compression scores 117435, data encryption scores 8121, and random string sorting scores 14706. The physics test scores 625, and the find prime numbers test scores 27.

Relative to its nearest rivals in the database, the Intel Core 3 N355 is essentially tied with the Intel Core i3-12100F, which has an average score of 13494. The N355 is also nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-9500, which scores 13452, coming in about 0.3 percent ahead of that older desktop part. The Intel Core 5 120UL scores 13594, which is about 0.8 percent higher than the N355, and the Intel Core i7-1250U scores 13351, which is about 1.1 percent lower. These narrow deltas show that the N355 sits in a crowded performance band where a few percentage points separate several competing parts.

For the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100, the lack of benchmark scores means the database cannot confirm how it would perform in Cinebench or PassMark workloads. Its 3.00 GHz base clock is higher than the Intel part’s 1.90 GHz base clock, but the Intel part’s 3.90 GHz boost clock may compensate in single-threaded bursts. The Snapdragon’s 25 W TDP and dual-channel LPDDR5X memory with 135.2 GB/s bandwidth suggest it is designed for sustained performance in memory-heavy tasks, while the Intel part’s 15 W TDP and single-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s indicate a more modest power envelope with less memory throughput.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in almost every physical and electrical specification. The Intel Core 3 N355 has a base clock of 1.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and no listed boost clock. The Intel part is rated at 15 W TDP, the Qualcomm part at 25 W TDP. The Intel chip uses Intel BGA 1264 socket, while the Qualcomm chip uses Qualcomm BGA 2073.

Memory support is a major differentiator. The Intel part supports DDR4, DDR5, and LPDDR5 memory on a single-channel bus with 38.4 GB/s of bandwidth. The Qualcomm part supports only LPDDR5X memory on a dual-channel bus with 135.2 GB/s of bandwidth. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCIe connectivity also differs. The Intel part provides PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only), while the Qualcomm part provides PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Qualcomm part offers a newer PCIe generation and more lanes, which can matter for storage and peripheral performance.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The Intel Core 3 N355 includes UHD Graphics 770, while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 includes Adreno X1-45. The database does not include graphics benchmark scores for either part, so no performance comparison can be made from recorded data.

The release dates differ. The Intel part was released on 2025-01-06, while the Qualcomm part was released on 2024-08-27. Both parts are listed as Active in production status, and neither has a launch MSRP recorded in the database. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 3 N355 uses the Twin Lake architecture, which the database identifies as part of the Core 3 generation and also cross-references as Alder Lake-N. Its process node is 10 nm, fabricated at Intel’s own foundry. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100 uses the Oryon codename, part of the Snapdragon X (Plus) generation, on a 4 nm process fabricated at TSMC. The foundry for Qualcomm is listed as TSMC, while Intel fabricates its own chip.

The cache hierarchy is structurally different between the two. The Intel part has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of shared L2 cache, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part has 288 KB of L1 cache per core, 12 MB of L2 cache per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm cache layout is much larger at the L1 and L2 levels, which suggests a design aimed at reducing memory latency and improving hit rates for frequently accessed data. The L3 cache is identical at 6 MB shared on both parts.

The core and thread counts are identical: both have 8 cores and 8 threads. Neither processor uses simultaneous multithreading. The base clock difference is notable: the Qualcomm part starts at 3.00 GHz, while the Intel part starts at 1.90 GHz and relies on a 3.90 GHz boost clock for peak performance. The Qualcomm part has no boost clock listed.

The memory controller design reflects different priorities. The Intel part’s single-channel memory bus with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth is typical of low-power, entry-level mobile chips. The Qualcomm part’s dual-channel bus with 135.2 GB/s bandwidth is more typical of higher-end mobile platforms. The PCIe implementation also differs, with Intel offering Gen 3 and 9 lanes versus Qualcomm’s Gen 4 and 12 lanes.

The integrated graphics are entirely different architectures. Intel uses UHD Graphics 770, which is part of Intel’s graphics lineup for its mobile processors. Qualcomm uses Adreno X1-45, which is part of Qualcomm’s Adreno GPU family. The database does not include any graphics-specific benchmarks for either processor, so the relative graphics performance remains unmeasured.

The manufacturer field for the Qualcomm part is listed as Unknown in the database, which is a data entry quirk, but the codename Oryon and the Snapdragon X (Plus) generation identify it as a Qualcomm product. The Intel part is clearly attributed to Intel. Both parts are mobile segment processors, both are Active in production, and both have fixed multipliers. The part numbers are SRPNT for Intel and X1P26100 for Qualcomm.

The benchmark data available for the Intel Core 3 N355 shows a processor that competes directly with established desktop and mobile parts from a few generations back. Its percentile rank of 68 and average score of 13492 put it in the same performance class as the Core i3-12100F and Core i5-9500. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-26-100, with its 4 nm process, larger caches, and much higher memory bandwidth, enters the low-power mobile space with a different design philosophy. The recorded data does not allow a direct performance comparison, but the architectural differences are clear: Intel targets compatibility and modest power draw with a single-channel memory system, while Qualcomm targets efficiency and memory throughput with a dual-channel LPDDR5X configuration.