CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-1210U and Intel Core i3-10105F represent two distinct approaches to the Core i3 brand: one is a mobile-first, low-power hybrid design, while the other is a desktop-focused, high-clock part. The benchmark data shows the 1210U as the overall performance leader, taking 14 of 17 head-to-head tests, despite the 10105F having a significantly higher base clock. The 1210U’s average benchmark score of 12795 places it just ahead of the 10105F’s 12644, and both sit in the 67th-68th percentile of all CPUs, indicating they are closely matched in overall capability despite their architectural differences.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i3-1210U leads in Cinebench R23 single-core with a score of 1187, compared to 1064 for the Intel Core i3-10105F. This represents an 11.6% advantage for the 1210U.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-10105F have an integrated GPU?

A: No, the Intel Core i3-10105F has no integrated graphics. In contrast, the Intel Core i3-1210U features UHD Graphics 64EU, making it a viable option for systems without a discrete graphics card.

Q: What is the TDP difference between these two chips?

A: The Intel Core i3-1210U has a TDP of 9 watts, while the Intel Core i3-10105F has a TDP of 65 watts. This makes the 1210U substantially more power-efficient on paper.

Q: Which CPU is better for data encryption workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-1210U is significantly better, scoring 6348 in Passmark data encryption versus 3045 for the Intel Core i3-10105F. The delta is a massive 108.5% in favor of the 1210U.

Q: Are there any benchmarks where the Intel Core i3-10105F wins?

A: Yes, the 10105F wins three Passmark tests: data compression (130647 vs 102965), extended instructions (8753 vs 5852), and random string sorting (16414 vs 11727). Its biggest win is a 33.1% margin in extended instructions.

Q: What is the launch MSRP of the Intel Core i3-10105F?

A: The launch MSRP of the Intel Core i3-10105F is $97.

Architecture Differences

The Core i3-1210U is built on Intel’s Alder Lake architecture using a 10 nm process node, while the Core i3-10105F uses the older Comet Lake architecture on a 14 nm node. This process advantage is a key differentiator, allowing the 1210U to achieve higher performance per watt. The 1210U features 6 cores and 8 threads, whereas the 10105F has 4 cores and 8 threads, meaning the 1210U brings two additional physical cores to the table.

Cache configurations differ substantially. The 1210U has 80 KB of L1 cache per core and 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, while the 10105F has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. In L3 cache, the 1210U offers 10 MB shared, compared to 6 MB shared on the 10105F. The 1210U supports both DDR4 and DDR5 memory, whereas the 10105F is limited to DDR4. The 1210U also features PCIe Gen 4, while the 10105F uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only).

The 1210U integrates UHD Graphics 64EU, a feature entirely absent from the 10105F. The 1210U targets the mobile segment with a socket of Intel BGA 1781 and a 9-watt TDP, while the 10105F is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1200 with a 65-watt TDP. The 10105F has a much higher base clock of 3.70 GHz versus 1.00 GHz on the 1210U, though both share the same 4.40 GHz boost clock. The 10105F has a listed memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, a figure not provided for the 1210U.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i3-1210U dominates the Cinebench suite, winning all six tests by a consistent margin. In Cinebench R15, it scores 847 multi-core and 119 single-core, versus 759 and 107 for the 10105F, both an 11.6% and 11.2% win respectively. The pattern holds in Cinebench R20 (3533 vs 3165 multi-core, 498 vs 446 single-core) and Cinebench R23 (8413 vs 7537 multi-core, 1187 vs 1064 single-core). The multi-core deltas are nearly identical across all versions, hovering around 11.6%, suggesting a stable architectural advantage.

The single-threaded Passmark test shows a clear 1210U victory, with a score of 3354 versus 2647, a 26.7% delta. This is a more pronounced gap than the Cinebench single-core results, indicating the 1210U’s Alder Lake cores are particularly strong in this workload. The 1210U also wins Passmark multi-thread (10228 vs 8930, a 14.5% delta) and floating point math (23815 vs 18166, a 31.1% delta). In integer math, the 1210U leads 34445 to 28921, a 19.1% margin.

The 1210U’s largest win comes in Passmark data encryption, where it scores 6348 against 3045, a 108.5% advantage. It also doubles the 10105F in find prime numbers (51 vs 25, a 104% delta) and wins physics by 36.8% (781 vs 571). The 10105F’s wins are concentrated in specific memory or instruction-heavy tasks. It wins data compression with a score of 130647 versus 102965, a 21.2% delta. It also wins extended instructions (8753 vs 5852, a 33.1% delta) and random string sorting (16414 vs 11727, a 28.6% delta).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every core specification. The 1210U has 6 cores and 8 threads, while the 10105F has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are drastically different: 1000 MHz for the 1210U versus 3700 MHz for the 10105F, though boost clocks are identical at 4400 MHz. The TDP figures are 9 watts for the 1210U and 65 watts for the 10105F.

Socket compatibility is separate, with the 1210U using Intel BGA 1781 and the 10105F using Intel Socket 1200. The process nodes differ, with the 1210U on 10 nm and the 10105F on 14 nm. Cache sizes are different across all levels: L1 is 80 KB per core on the 1210U versus 64 KB per core on the 10105F; L2 is 1.25 MB per core versus 256 KB per core; L3 is 10 MB shared versus 6 MB shared.

Memory support shows the 1210U supporting both DDR4 and DDR5, while the 10105F only supports DDR4. The 1210U has PCIe Gen 4, whereas the 10105F has PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The 1210U includes integrated UHD Graphics 64EU, while the 10105F has no integrated graphics. The market segments differ (Mobile vs Desktop), as do the release dates: the 1210U was released on 2022-02-22 and the 10105F on 2021-03-15. The 10105F has a part number of SRH8V and a launch MSRP of $97, while the 1210U has no MSRP listed.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-1210U is the clear winner for general-purpose and compute-heavy workloads. Its 14 benchmark wins cover multi-core rendering, single-thread performance, and math-heavy tasks. For users running Cinebench-style workloads or any application that relies on floating-point arithmetic, the 1210U offers substantial gains, ranging from 11.6% in multi-core to 31.1% in floating point math. Its 108.5% lead in data encryption makes it the obvious choice for security-related tasks, and its 104% advantage in prime number finding suggests superior integer throughput in certain algorithms.

The 1210U’s mobile design, with a 9-watt TDP and integrated graphics, makes it suitable for compact systems where power consumption is critical. Its support for DDR5 memory and PCIe Gen 4 future-proofs it for newer system components. The 1210U also wins the physics test by 36.8%, indicating better performance in simulation workloads.

The Intel Core i3-10105F wins in three specific Passmark tests: data compression, extended instructions, and random string sorting. Its 33.1% win in extended instructions suggests a strength in workloads that utilize specialized instruction sets, possibly benefiting from its higher base clock in single-threaded bursts. The 21.2% win in data compression and 28.6% win in random string sorting point to advantages in memory-bound operations where the 10105F’s 42.7 GB/s memory bandwidth and higher base clock can be leveraged.

For users who prioritize raw clock speed and have workloads that are sensitive to base frequency, the 10105F’s 3.70 GHz base clock is a notable asset. Its desktop socket and 65-watt TDP make it a straightforward drop-in for existing LGA 1200 motherboards. However, the data shows that the 1210U’s newer architecture and additional cores provide a broader performance advantage in most scenarios, making it the stronger choice for users who do not have a specific need for the 10105F’s niche wins.