Intel Core 7 150HL vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data contains no head-to-head benchmark entries for this pairing. Both processors have an average benchmark score of zero in the database, and neither holds a single win in direct comparison tests. The percentile ranking for both is identical at 50, placing them at the midpoint of all CPUs tracked. Without measured scores, the performance relationship between the Intel Core 7 150HL and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 cannot be established from the database at this time.

What can be stated from the available information is the structural asymmetry between the two parts. The Intel chip presents 14 cores and 20 threads, while the Snapdragon presents 12 cores and 12 threads. Thread counts alone suggest the Intel part can process more concurrent work streams, but no benchmark confirms how that translates into real-world performance. The absence of direct measurements means any quantitative comparison would be speculative, and this analysis restricts itself to the recorded facts.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different design philosophies. Intel's Core 7 150HL uses the Raptor Lake architecture, specifically the Raptor Lake-PS codename, built on Intel's 10 nm process node at Intel's own foundry. Qualcomm's Snapdragon X1E-80-100 uses the Oryon codename under the Snapdragon X (Elite) generation, fabricated on TSMC's 4 nm process node. The process node difference is substantial: 10 nm versus 4 nm, indicating the Qualcomm part uses a significantly more advanced manufacturing process.

Core and thread configurations differ sharply. The Intel part offers 14 cores and 20 threads, implying a hybrid arrangement with performance and efficiency cores, a common Raptor Lake design trait. The Qualcomm part offers 12 cores and 12 threads, suggesting a homogeneous core design without simultaneous multithreading. Base clock speeds favor Qualcomm at 3.40 GHz versus Intel's 2.40 GHz, but boost clocks favor Intel at 5.00 GHz versus Qualcomm's 4.00 GHz. The Intel chip therefore has a higher ceiling for single-thread bursts, while the Qualcomm chip runs faster at its baseline.

Cache hierarchies diverge completely. Intel allocates 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 per core, and 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Qualcomm allocates 288 KB of L1 per core, 12 MB of L2 per module, and only 6 MB of shared L3. The Qualcomm part has substantially larger per-core L1 and per-module L2, but far less shared L3. These cache strategies reflect different workload assumptions: Intel emphasizing a large shared pool for multi-threaded scaling, Qualcomm emphasizing local data locality per core or module.

Memory support also differs. Intel supports both DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. Qualcomm supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, but the database records a specific memory bandwidth figure of 135.2 GB/s for the Snapdragon part. Intel's memory bandwidth is not recorded. The Qualcomm part also uses a different socket, Qualcomm BGA 2073, versus Intel Socket 1700. PCIe connectivity differs as well: Intel provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while Qualcomm provides Gen 4 with 12 lanes from the CPU.

Integrated graphics differ by vendor and capability. Intel integrates Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. Qualcomm integrates Adreno X1-85. Both are integrated solutions, but their performance characteristics are not quantified in the database. The Intel part targets the desktop market segment, while the Qualcomm part targets mobile. The Intel chip has a 45 W TDP, the Qualcomm chip has a 35 W TDP, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. The Intel part was released on 2024-04-07, the Qualcomm part on 2024-04-23, a gap of 16 days.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core 7 150HL has 14 cores and 20 threads. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 has 12 cores and 12 threads. Intel leads in both counts, with eight additional threads beyond its core count, indicating multithreading capability that Qualcomm does not offer.

Q: What are the clock speed differences?

A: The Qualcomm part has a higher base clock at 3.40 GHz versus Intel's 2.40 GHz. The Intel part has a higher boost clock at 5.00 GHz versus Qualcomm's 4.00 GHz. The Intel chip can reach a higher maximum frequency, while the Qualcomm chip starts from a faster baseline.

Q: How do the manufacturing processes compare?

A: Intel uses a 10 nm process node at its own foundry. Qualcomm uses a 4 nm process node at TSMC. The 4 nm node is more advanced, allowing for smaller transistors and potentially better power efficiency per operation.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: Intel has 24 MB of shared L3 cache. Qualcomm has 6 MB of shared L3 cache. Intel's L3 pool is four times larger, which can benefit workloads that share data across many cores.

Q: What memory types does each support?

A: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 in a dual-channel configuration. Qualcomm supports only LPDDR5X, also dual-channel, with a recorded memory bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s. Intel's memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: Intel is rated at 45 W. Qualcomm is rated at 35 W. The Qualcomm part draws less power under its rated envelope, which aligns with its mobile market segment.

The Verdict

The data shows two processors aimed at different segments with different design priorities. The Intel Core 7 150HL is a desktop part with a 45 W TDP, 14 cores, 20 threads, a 5.00 GHz boost clock, 24 MB of shared L3 cache, and support for both DDR4 and DDR5. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 is a mobile part with a 35 W TDP, 12 cores, 12 threads, a 3.40 GHz base clock, 135.2 GB/s of recorded memory bandwidth, and a 4 nm process node from TSMC.

For workloads that benefit from high thread counts and a large shared cache, the Intel part has the structural advantage. For workloads that favor a fast baseline clock, lower power consumption, and a more advanced manufacturing process, the Qualcomm part has the structural advantage. Neither part has measured benchmark scores in the database, so a definitive performance verdict is not possible from the recorded data. The choice between them depends on the target platform: desktop users will find the Intel part compatible with Socket 1700 motherboards, while mobile users will find the Qualcomm part on its BGA 2073 socket.

The Intel part offers a higher boost clock and more threads, which typically helps bursty single-threaded tasks and heavily parallel workloads. The Qualcomm part offers a higher base clock and a smaller process node, which typically helps sustained low-power operation and battery-conscious mobile devices. Both parts are active in production, and both occupy the 50th percentile among all CPUs tracked, indicating neither is positioned as a top-tier performer or a low-end part according to the database's rankings.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core 7 150HL | Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 |

|---|---|---|

| Cores | 14 | 12 |

| Threads | 20 | 12 |

| Base clock | 2.40 GHz | 3.40 GHz |

| Boost clock | 5.00 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| TDP | 45 W | 35 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1700 | Qualcomm BGA 2073 |

| Codename | Raptor Lake-PS | Oryon |

| Generation | Core 7 (Raptor Lake-PS) | Snapdragon X (Elite) |

| Process node | 10 nm | 4 nm |

| Foundry | Intel | TSMC |

| L1 cache | 80 KB per core | 288 KB per core |

| L2 cache | 2 MB per core | 12 MB per module |

| L3 cache | 24 MB shared | 6 MB shared |

| Memory support | DDR4, DDR5 | LPDDR5X |

| Memory bandwidth | Not recorded | 135.2 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 4, 8 lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 12 lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated graphics | Iris Xe Graphics 96EU | Adreno X1-85 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Part number | unknown | X1E80100 |

| Release date | 2024-04-07 | 2024-04-23 |

The table captures all recorded differences. Both parts lack a launch MSRP in the database, both have ECC memory disabled, both lack an unlocked multiplier, and both are active in production. The Intel part does not have a recorded part number, while the Qualcomm part carries the identifier X1E80100.

Where Each One Wins

Based strictly on the recorded specifications, the Intel Core 7 150HL wins in several structural categories. It has more cores (14 versus 12) and more threads (20 versus 12), giving it a clear advantage in multi-threaded throughput potential. Its boost clock of 5.00 GHz exceeds Qualcomm's 4.00 GHz, indicating a higher ceiling for single-thread burst performance. Its 24 MB of shared L3 cache dwarfs Qualcomm's 6 MB, which benefits workloads that repeatedly access a large shared dataset. Intel also supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, offering flexibility in platform memory choices, and it targets the desktop segment, which typically allows for more robust cooling and sustained operation.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X1E-80-100 wins in other categories. Its base clock of 3.40 GHz is substantially higher than Intel's 2.40 GHz, indicating faster operation at idle-to-moderate loads. Its 4 nm process node from TSMC is more advanced than Intel's 10 nm node, suggesting better transistor density and potentially better power efficiency per unit of work. Its TDP of 35 W is lower than Intel's 45 W, which aligns with mobile usage where power draw directly affects battery life and thermal management. Its LPDDR5X memory support comes with a recorded bandwidth of 135.2 GB/s, a concrete figure that Intel cannot match in the database. Its per-core L1 cache of 288 KB is more than three times Intel's 80 KB, and its per-module L2 of 12 MB is six times Intel's per-core 2 MB, indicating a design that prioritizes local data access. Its PCIe implementation offers 12 lanes versus Intel's 8, providing more direct CPU-attached expansion bandwidth. Its mobile segment designation and BGA socket make it suitable for compact, integrated devices.

The database shows no measured benchmark wins for either part, so these advantages are purely architectural. The Intel part presents a conventional high-thread-count desktop design with a large shared cache and high boost capability. The Qualcomm part presents a modern low-power mobile design with high base clocks, a leading-edge process node, and a wide memory bandwidth figure. The choice between them rests on the target platform and workload profile, not on any recorded performance measurement.