Intel Core i3-10105 vs Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads, while the Intel Core i3-10105 has 4 cores and 8 threads. The Ultra 3 also carries a larger shared L3 cache of 10 MB versus 6 MB on the i3.

Q: How do their boost clocks compare?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL boosts up to 4.20 GHz, while the Intel Core i3-10105 boosts slightly higher to 4.40 GHz. Despite the lower boost ceiling, the Ultra 3 still wins all single-core benchmark comparisons in the database.

Q: What is the power rating difference?

A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL is rated at 15 W TDP, whereas the Core i3-10105 is rated at 65 W TDP. This indicates a substantially lower thermal design point for the Ultra 3.

Q: Which CPU supports faster memory bandwidth?

A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL supports DDR5 memory with a measured bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s, while the Core i3-10105 supports DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s. The Ultra 3 offers more than double the theoretical memory bandwidth.

Q: Which processor is newer and what socket does each use?

A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL was released in April 2024 and uses Intel Socket 1851 with the Meteor Lake architecture. The Core i3-10105 was released in March 2021 and uses Intel Socket 1200 with the Comet Lake architecture.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The Core Ultra 3 105UL has an average benchmark score of 13061, placing it in the 68th percentile of all CPUs. The Core i3-10105 has an average score of 12316, placing it in the 67th percentile. The Ultra 3's nearest rivals include the Core i5-9400F (13041, 0.2% behind) and Core i7-10750H (13024, 0.3% behind).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different Intel design eras. The Core Ultra 3 105UL is built on the Meteor Lake architecture, specifically the Meteor Lake-PS variant, and uses a 7 nm process node. The Core i3-10105 uses the older Comet Lake architecture, specifically Comet Lake-R, on a 14 nm process node. This process gap is significant: the Ultra 3's 7 nm node allows for a much denser and more power-efficient design.

The cache hierarchies differ notably. The Ultra 3 105UL has 112 KB of L1 cache per core and 2 MB of L2 cache per core, with 10 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-10105 has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3. The Ultra 3 therefore offers substantially more per-core L2 and more total L3, which helps in workloads that repeatedly access a working set of data.

Memory support diverges sharply. The Ultra 3 105UL uses DDR5 memory, with the motherboard determining the exact configuration, and has a dual-channel memory bus delivering 89.6 GB/s. The i3-10105 uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus at 42.7 GB/s. The Ultra 3's memory bandwidth advantage is more than double, which can affect data-heavy tasks and integrated graphics performance.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The Ultra 3 105UL provides Gen 4 with 8 lanes from the CPU, while the i3-10105 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i3 has more physical lanes, but the Ultra 3's lanes run at the newer Gen 4 standard. Integrated graphics also differ: the Ultra 3 uses Arc Xe-LPG with 48 execution units, while the i3-10105 uses UHD Graphics 630.

Both processors have locked multipliers, meaning neither supports unlocked overclocking. Both are classified as desktop market segments and remain in active production. Neither supports ECC memory.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a sweeping victory for the Core Ultra 3 105UL in most tests, but the i3-10105 claims a few notable specialty wins. The Ultra 3 wins 14 of the 17 recorded head-to-head comparisons.

In Cinebench testing, the Ultra 3 is consistently about 24% faster across the board. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 881 versus 708 for the i3, a 24.4% lead. Single-core R15 shows 124 versus 99, a 25.3% advantage. R20 multi-core repeats the pattern at 3671 versus 2952, again 24.4% ahead. R20 single-core shows 518 versus 416, a 24.5% lead. R23 multi-core records 8742 versus 7029, and R23 single-core records 1234 versus 992, both at 24.4% deltas. These results indicate the Ultra 3's architectural efficiency and higher core count translate directly into rendering performance.

PassMark tests reveal where each CPU excels. The Ultra 3 wins data encryption with a massive 133.3% lead: 6354 versus 2723. It also dominates find prime numbers, scoring 44 versus 20, a 120% advantage. Floating point math goes to the Ultra 3 at 30750 versus 17949, a 71.3% lead. Physics simulation shows 718 versus 467, a 53.7% advantage. Integer math is 41171 versus 28577, up 44.1%. Multi-threaded PassMark scores 10285 versus 8241, a 24.8% lead. Single-thread PassMark scores 3382 versus 2589, a 30.6% advantage.

The i3-10105 wins three specific PassMark workloads. Data compression goes to the i3 at 128464 versus 93961, a 26.9% lead for the i3. Extended instructions show 8648 versus 5634, a 34.9% advantage for the i3. Random string sorting records 15899 versus 11179, a 29.7% lead for the i3. These wins suggest the i3-10105 has strengths in certain algorithm-heavy or compression-oriented tasks, despite losing the broader benchmark suite.

Specification Differences

The two CPUs differ across nearly every major specification category. The Ultra 3 105UL has 8 cores and 10 threads; the i3-10105 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 1.50 GHz for the Ultra 3 versus 3.70 GHz for the i3. Boost clocks are 4.20 GHz versus 4.40 GHz. TDP is 15 W versus 65 W.

The socket and architecture are entirely different: Intel Socket 1851 with Meteor Lake for the Ultra 3, Intel Socket 1200 with Comet Lake for the i3. Process nodes are 7 nm versus 14 nm. Cache configurations differ: L1 is 112 KB per core versus 64 KB per core, L2 is 2 MB per core versus 256 KB per core, and L3 is 10 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory support differs: DDR5 versus DDR4, with bandwidth of 89.6 GB/s versus 42.7 GB/s. PCIe is Gen 4 with 8 lanes versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes. Integrated graphics are Arc Xe-LPG 48EU versus UHD Graphics 630. Release dates are April 2024 versus March 2021. The launch MSRP for the Ultra 3 105UL is $295, and for the i3-10105 it is $122.

Where Each One Wins

The Core Ultra 3 105UL is the clear winner for multi-threaded productivity and rendering. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 8742 versus 7029 gives it a 24.4% edge in CPU-bound rendering workloads. It also leads in physics simulation (718 versus 467, 53.7% ahead), integer math (44.1% ahead), and floating point math (71.3% ahead). For users running video encoding, 3D rendering, or scientific computation, the Ultra 3's 8 cores and 10 threads provide a substantial advantage over the i3's 4 cores and 8 threads.

The Ultra 3 also wins single-threaded performance despite its lower boost clock. PassMark single-thread shows 3382 versus 2589, a 30.6% lead. Cinebench R23 single-core shows 1234 versus 992, a 24.4% lead. This suggests the newer Meteor Lake architecture delivers higher instructions per clock than the older Comet Lake design, making the Ultra 3 the better choice for everyday responsiveness and lightly threaded applications.

The i3-10105 wins in three specialized PassMark workloads: data compression (128464 versus 93961), extended instructions (8648 versus 5634), and random string sorting (15899 versus 11179). These results indicate the i3 has an advantage in certain data-processing and compression tasks, possibly due to its higher base clock of 3.70 GHz and different instruction execution characteristics. Users running compression utilities or string-heavy data processing may see better performance from the i3.

The i3-10105 also offers more PCIe lanes at 16 versus 8, though at the older Gen 3 standard. For systems with many expansion cards or storage devices, the extra lanes could matter, assuming the platform supports them.

The Verdict

The benchmark data clearly favors the Intel Core Ultra 3 105UL for the vast majority of workloads. It wins 14 of 17 head-to-head comparisons, including every Cinebench test and most PassMark tests. Its 24.4% lead in Cinebench R23 multi-core and 30.6% lead in PassMark single-thread demonstrate that it outperforms the i3-10105 in both parallel and single-threaded scenarios. The Ultra 3 achieves this while rated at only 15 W TDP versus 65 W for the i3, a remarkable efficiency difference. Its DDR5 memory support with 89.6 GB/s bandwidth more than doubles the i3's 42.7 GB/s.

The Core i3-10105 is the better choice only for specific compression and string-sorting workloads. Its data compression score of 128464 is 26.9% higher than the Ultra 3's 93961, its extended instructions score is 34.9% higher, and its random string sorting score is 29.7% higher. The i3 also has more PCIe lanes (16 versus 8), which may benefit systems needing many Gen 3 devices. Its lower launch MSRP of $122 compared to $295 is a differentiating factor, though the performance gap in most tests is substantial.

For a general-purpose desktop CPU, the database points to the Ultra 3 105UL as the stronger processor. Its higher core count, larger caches, newer architecture, faster memory support, and broader benchmark wins make it the default recommendation for most users. The i3-10105 remains relevant only for niche compression-heavy workloads or for systems requiring the older Socket 1200 platform with more PCIe lanes. The data does not support choosing the i3 for general productivity, rendering, or gaming, where the Ultra 3 leads by wide margins in nearly every recorded test.