Intel Core 7 150U vs Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the core counts and thread counts differ between the Intel Core 7 150U and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U has 10 cores and 12 threads. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 has 18 cores and 18 threads. The Intel part uses hyperthreading (12 threads from 10 cores), while the Qualcomm part runs one thread per core.

Q: What are the base and boost clock speeds for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U has a base clock of 1.80 GHz and a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 has a base clock of 4.45 GHz and a boost clock of 4.70 GHz. The Intel processor has a much wider frequency range, with a significantly higher top boost.

Q: Which processor has a smaller manufacturing process node?

A: The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. The Intel Core 7 150U uses a 10 nm process at Intel. The Qualcomm part uses a more advanced fabrication node.

Q: What memory types do the two processors support?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a dual-channel configuration. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 supports LPDDR5X memory in a triple-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 228.6 GB/s.

Q: What is the cache hierarchy for each processor?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 12 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 has 288 KB of L1 cache per core, 16 MB of L2 cache per module, and 9 MB of shared L3 cache. The Qualcomm part has larger per-core L1 and L2 allocations, while Intel has a larger L3 pool.

Q: Which processor has more PCIe lanes and what generation?

A: The Intel Core 7 150U provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes (CPU only). The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes (CPU only). The Qualcomm part offers both a newer PCIe generation and more lanes.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core 7 150U wins decisively in all recorded benchmark categories, as the database shows a complete set of scores for the Intel part while the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 currently has no benchmark entries. The Intel processor's percentile rank of 71 versus the Qualcomm part's rank of 50 indicates that the Intel part sits higher in the overall performance distribution. However, the Qualcomm part's strengths are evident from its specification sheet rather than from measured scores.

The Intel Core 7 150U delivers strong single-threaded performance with a boost clock of 5.40 GHz. Its recorded scores include a Geekbench single-core score of 1857, a Cinebench R23 single-core score of 1875.5, and a Passmark single-thread score of 3508. These numbers indicate that the Intel part excels in lightly threaded workloads such as everyday application responsiveness, web browsing, and productivity tasks.

In multi-threaded workloads, the Intel Core 7 150U also shows solid results. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8883 and Geekbench multi-core score of 6234 demonstrate capable sustained performance for parallel tasks. The Passmark multithread score of 14700 and the Passmark integer math score of 51057 further support this conclusion. The Intel part's 10 cores with 12 threads provide reasonable parallelism for content creation and compilation workloads.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100, despite lacking recorded benchmarks, presents a different set of potential advantages based on its specifications. Its 18 cores and 18 threads exceed the Intel part's core count by 8 cores. The Qualcomm part also has a much higher base clock of 4.45 GHz, which suggests strong sustained all-core performance without the need for aggressive boosting. The triple-channel LPDDR5X memory with 228.6 GB/s of bandwidth vastly exceeds the Intel part's dual-channel configuration in theoretical memory throughput, which could benefit memory-intensive workloads such as large data processing or AI inference.

The Qualcomm part's 3 nm process node and PCIe Gen 5 support with 12 lanes indicate a more modern platform foundation. The integrated Adreno X2-90 graphics may offer different capabilities than the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 96EU, though no benchmark data exists to compare them directly. The Qualcomm part's larger die size of 220 mm² suggests a complex silicon design that may include specialized accelerators.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core 7 150U uses the Raptor Lake architecture with the Raptor Lake-U codename, part of the Core 7 generation. It is built on a 10 nm process at Intel's foundry. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 uses the Glymur codename, part of the Snapdragon X2 Elite generation, and is built on a 3 nm process at TSMC. These architectures represent fundamentally different design philosophies: Intel's hybrid approach with performance and efficiency cores versus Qualcomm's homogeneous high-core-count design.

The Intel part integrates 10 cores and 12 threads, indicating a hybrid configuration where some cores support simultaneous multithreading. Its cache hierarchy includes 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and 12 MB of shared L3. The Qualcomm part has 18 cores and 18 threads, with 288 KB of L1 per core, 16 MB of L2 per module, and 9 MB of shared L3. The per-module L2 structure suggests a multi-cluster design where cores share L2 within modules.

Memory architecture differs substantially. The Intel Core 7 150U uses a dual-channel memory bus supporting DDR4 and DDR5, a conventional approach for mobile x86 processors. The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 uses a triple-channel LPDDR5X configuration with a memory bandwidth of 228.6 GB/s, a much wider and faster memory subsystem. This difference reflects the Qualcomm part's focus on memory-intensive workloads and its integration in a newer platform.

PCIe connectivity also differs. Intel provides PCIe Gen 4 with 8 lanes, while Qualcomm provides PCIe Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The newer PCIe generation and higher lane count on the Qualcomm part enable faster peripheral connectivity and more expansion options. The socket types differ as well: Intel uses BGA 1744, and Qualcomm uses BGA 2343, indicating incompatible platforms.

The integrated graphics differ between the two parts. Intel uses Iris Xe Graphics with 96 execution units. Qualcomm uses Adreno X2-90. Neither part has recorded graphics benchmarks in the database, so direct comparison is not possible from measured data. The production status for both is Active, and both target the mobile market segment.

Specification Differences

The Intel Core 7 150U and Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 differ in several key specifications. The Intel part has 10 cores and 12 threads, while the Qualcomm part has 18 cores and 18 threads. Base clocks differ significantly: 1.80 GHz for Intel versus 4.45 GHz for Qualcomm. Boost clocks also differ: 5.40 GHz for Intel versus 4.70 GHz for Qualcomm. The Intel part has a wider frequency range with a higher maximum boost.

The manufacturing process differs: Intel uses 10 nm, Qualcomm uses 3 nm. The foundries also differ: Intel uses its own foundry, Qualcomm uses TSMC. Die size is recorded only for the Qualcomm part at 220 mm². The cache configurations differ as described previously. Memory support differs: Intel supports DDR4 and DDR5 in dual-channel, Qualcomm supports LPDDR5X in triple-channel with a recorded bandwidth of 228.6 GB/s.

PCIe generations and lane counts differ: Intel has Gen 4 with 8 lanes, Qualcomm has Gen 5 with 12 lanes. The integrated graphics differ with Iris Xe Graphics 96EU on Intel and Adreno X2-90 on Qualcomm. The socket types differ: Intel BGA 1744 versus Qualcomm BGA 2343. The TDP is recorded as 15 for the Intel part, while the Qualcomm part has no recorded TDP. The release dates differ: the Intel part was released on 2024-01-07, and the Qualcomm part was released on 2026-04-05.

Part numbers also differ: SRMYP for Intel, X2E94100 for Qualcomm. Neither part has a recorded launch MSRP. Both have ECC memory support set to false, and both have unlocked multipliers set to false. The market segment for both is mobile, and both are in Active production status.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database contains no head-to-head benchmark entries between the Intel Core 7 150U and the Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100. The Qualcomm part has an empty benchmark array, meaning no recorded scores exist for any test. The Intel part, conversely, has a full set of benchmark scores across Cinebench, Geekbench, and Passmark tests.

The Intel Core 7 150U's recorded scores provide a baseline for what the Qualcomm part would need to surpass. In Cinebench R15, the Intel part scores 1505.5 in multi-core and 254 in single-core. In Cinebench R20, scores are 5248 multi-core and 740 single-core. In Cinebench R23, scores are 8883 multi-core and 1875.5 single-core. Geekbench results show 6234 multi-core and 1857 single-core.

Passmark results for the Intel part include data compression at 158622, data encryption at 10025, extended instructions at 8748, find prime numbers at 58, floating point math at 34405, integer math at 51057, multithread at 14700, physics at 1012, random string sorting at 18269, and single-thread at 3508. The average benchmark score for the Intel part is 17395, with a percentile rank of 71 against all CPUs.

The Qualcomm Snapdragon X2E-94-100 has an average benchmark score of 0 and a percentile rank of 50. With no recorded scores, the database cannot show any wins for the Qualcomm part. The wins count is 0 for both parts, as the head-to-head comparison has no data. The Intel part's nearest rivals are all AMD processors: the Ryzen 5 4500 with a delta of 0.4%, the Ryzen 3 210 with a delta of 0.4%, the Ryzen 3 PRO 5355GE with a delta of -0.5%, and the Ryzen 5 4600G with a delta of -0.6%. These deltas indicate that the Intel Core 7 150U performs within a narrow band around these AMD parts, within about half a percent either way.

The lack of benchmark data for the Qualcomm part means any comparison must rely on specifications. The Qualcomm part's 18 cores at a 4.45 GHz base clock could potentially deliver strong multi-threaded performance, but no measured scores confirm this. The Intel part's boost clock of 5.40 GHz suggests a single-thread advantage. The recorded data supports only the Intel part's measured performance, leaving the Qualcomm part's capabilities unquantified in the database.