Intel Core 5 210H vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core 5 210H holds a decisive advantage across every recorded benchmark in the database. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has no benchmark entries, so the comparison is one-sided. The Intel part delivers a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11830 and a single-core score of 1771. In Cinebench R20, the multi-core result is 6504 with a single-core score of 918. The older Cinebench R15 test shows a multi-core score of 1757 and a single-core score of 247.

PassMark results reinforce the Intel processor's dominance. The multi-thread score stands at 18252, while single-thread performance is recorded at 3539. Integer math scores reach 61503, and floating-point math scores hit 45057. Data compression produces a score of 217805, while data encryption records 12187. Extended instruction performance is measured at 13370, and random string sorting yields 23451. The physics test returns 1040, and prime number finding scores 53.

The Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has no benchmark data in the database. Its average benchmark score is listed as 0, and its percentile versus all CPUs is 50. The Intel Core 5 210H, by contrast, sits at the 77th percentile. The average benchmark score for the Intel chip is 24872. The nearest rivals in the database for the Intel part include the Intel Core i7-13620H (average score 24911, delta -0.2 percent), the AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX (average score 24822, delta 0.2 percent), the Intel Core i7-11850H (average score 24935, delta -0.3 percent), and the AMD Ryzen 5 7500F (average score 24964, delta -0.4 percent). These deltas are all within a fraction of a percent, indicating that the Core 5 210H sits in a tightly contested performance cluster.

Because the Snapdragon part has no recorded scores, the head-to-head is not a matter of close margins. The Intel processor's recorded data shows a full suite of results, while the Qualcomm processor's record is empty. The wins count in the database reflects this: the Intel part has 0 wins and the Qualcomm part has 0 wins, but that is because the head-to-head benchmark array is empty. The practical reading is that the Intel chip offers measurable performance across every test category, while the Qualcomm chip offers none in the database.

The Verdict

The data supports only one conclusion for raw compute performance: the Intel Core 5 210H is the clear choice. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11830 indicates strong sustained multi-threaded capability, and the single-core score of 1771 shows solid per-thread responsiveness. The PassMark integer and floating-point scores of 61503 and 45057, respectively, confirm that the Intel part handles both general arithmetic and scientific workloads effectively. The data compression score of 217805 is particularly strong, indicating efficient memory and cache utilization.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 cannot be evaluated from the database because it has zero recorded benchmark scores. Its percentile of 50 suggests it sits at the median of all CPUs in the database, but without direct scores, any performance claim would lack support. The Intel part's 77th percentile places it well above the median. For any application that relies on CPU throughput, the Intel Core 5 210H is the only part with evidence of performance.

The nearest rivals to the Intel part all have average scores within 0.4 percent of its 24872 average. This means the Core 5 210H competes on par with processors like the Intel Core i7-13620H and AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX. The Snapdragon part has no such comparable data. Users who need a processor with verified performance in rendering, encryption, compression, and math workloads should select the Intel Core 5 210H.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 5 210H uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-H codename, with a generation listed as Core 5 (Raptor Lake Refresh). It is built on a 10 nm process node at Intel's foundry. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 uses the Oryon codename and belongs to the Snapdragon X (Plus) generation. It is manufactured on a 4 nm process node at TSMC. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 4 nm indicates a more advanced lithography for the Qualcomm part, which typically allows for higher density and lower power draw per transistor.

Core configuration differs significantly. The Intel processor has 8 cores and 12 threads, meaning it supports hyper-threading or a similar technology that allows additional threads per core. The Qualcomm processor has 10 cores and 10 threads, meaning no thread-doubling capability; each core maps to exactly one thread. The Intel part's 12 threads versus its 8 cores gives it a 1.5 thread-to-core ratio, while the Qualcomm part is 1:1.

Cache hierarchies are distinct. The Intel Core 5 210H features 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 offers 288 KB of L1 per core, 12 MB of L2 per module, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Qualcomm L2 cache is considerably larger per module, while the Intel L3 cache is twice the size of Qualcomm's L3. The total cache distribution suggests different design priorities: Intel favors a larger shared L3, while Qualcomm allocates more to L1 and L2.

Integrated graphics also differ. The Intel part uses Iris Xe Graphics with 48 execution units. The Qualcomm part uses Adreno X1-85. No benchmark scores exist for either iGPU in this database, so performance cannot be compared directly. The architecture of the Adreno GPU is Qualcomm's custom design, whereas Iris Xe is Intel's integrated solution.

The PCIe interface differs as well. The Intel processor supports PCIe Gen 5 with 8 lanes from the CPU. The Qualcomm processor supports PCIe Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU. The Intel part has a newer PCIe generation, but the Qualcomm part offers more lanes. Memory support also differs: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5, while Qualcomm supports LPDDR5X. The Qualcomm memory bandwidth is recorded at 135.2 GB/s, while the Intel part has no bandwidth figure in the database.

Specification Differences

The base clock speeds differ. The Intel Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no boost clock recorded in the database. The Qualcomm base clock is 1.2 GHz higher than the Intel base clock, but the Intel boost clock provides a 1.4 GHz headroom over its own base. The absence of a boost clock for the Qualcomm part means the database records only its sustained base frequency.

Thermal design power differs: the Intel part has a TDP of 45 watts, while the Qualcomm part has a TDP of 35 watts. The Intel part draws 10 watts more, which is consistent with its higher boost clock and larger thread count. The Qualcomm part's lower TDP suggests a power efficiency advantage, but no power consumption measurements appear in the database.

Sockets are not interchangeable. The Intel processor uses Intel BGA 1744, while the Qualcomm processor uses Qualcomm BGA 2073. No other socket details are available. The part numbers are SRQ6RQ5MN for Intel and X1P64100 for Qualcomm. The Intel part has a launch MSRP of $342, while the Qualcomm part has no launch MSRP recorded. The Intel part was released on 2024-12-17, and the Qualcomm part was released on 2024-04-23, making the Qualcomm part earlier by roughly eight months.

Memory support: the Intel part supports DDR4 and DDR5, while the Qualcomm part supports LPDDR5X. Both use dual-channel memory buses. ECC memory is not supported by either part. The Intel multiplier is locked, and the Qualcomm multiplier is also locked. Both are mobile market segments. The Intel production status is Active, and the Qualcomm production status is Active.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has 10 cores and 10 threads. The Intel Core 5 210H has 8 cores and 12 threads. The Intel part has fewer cores but more threads due to its 12-thread count against 8 cores.

Q: What is the clock speed difference between the two?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H has a base clock of 2.20 GHz and a boost clock of 4.80 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no recorded boost clock. The Qualcomm base clock is higher, but the Intel boost clock exceeds it.

Q: How do their cache configurations compare?

A: The Intel part has 80 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per core, and 12 MB shared L3. The Qualcomm part has 288 KB L1 per core, 12 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB shared L3. Intel has a larger L3, while Qualcomm has larger L1 and L2 allocations.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 is built on a 4 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 5 210H is built on a 10 nm process at Intel. The Qualcomm process node is smaller.

Q: What are the TDP values?

A: The Intel Core 5 210H has a TDP of 45 watts. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has a TDP of 35 watts. The Qualcomm part has a lower thermal design power.

Q: Which processor has recorded benchmark scores?

A: Only the Intel Core 5 210H has recorded benchmark scores in the database. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has no benchmark entries, an average benchmark score of 0, and no nearest rivals listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 5 210H wins in every benchmark category that has data. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 11830 and single-core score of 1771 indicate strong performance in both parallel and single-threaded rendering workloads. The PassMark multi-thread score of 18252 and single-thread score of 3539 reinforce this dual strength. For integer math at 61503 and floating-point math at 45057, the Intel part handles computation-heavy tasks with clear capability. Data compression at 217805 and encryption at 12187 show that storage and security workloads are well served. Extended instructions at 13370 and random string sorting at 23451 indicate robust handling of specialized instruction sets and sorting algorithms. Physics at 1040 and prime number finding at 53 round out the test suite.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 has no recorded wins in the database because no benchmark scores exist. Its 50th percentile placement suggests it sits at the median of all CPUs, but without direct scores, no specific workload advantage can be identified. The Intel part's 77th percentile places it above the median, and its average benchmark score of 24872 gives it a measurable baseline.

For users prioritizing multi-threaded rendering, data compression, encryption, or math-heavy calculations, the Intel Core 5 210H is the only part with evidence of performance. The Qualcomm part offers a higher base clock, a smaller process node, a larger L2 cache, and a lower TDP, but none of these specifications translate into recorded benchmark advantages. The Intel part's boost clock of 4.80 GHz provides a higher maximum frequency, and its 12 threads give it additional parallel execution capacity over the Qualcomm's 10 threads.

The database shows the Intel Core 5 210H as a competitive performer among its nearest rivals, with average scores within 0.4 percent of the Intel Core i7-13620H, AMD Ryzen 9 5900HX, Intel Core i7-11850H, and AMD Ryzen 5 7500F. The Qualcomm part has no comparable rival data. For any workload where CPU throughput is the deciding factor, the Intel Core 5 210H is the verified choice. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1P-64-100 may offer architectural advantages in process node and cache size, but the absence of benchmark data leaves its real-world performance unmeasured. The Intel part wins on evidence.