AMD Ryzen 3 3100U vs Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded benchmark data presents a decisive and one-sided performance landscape. Across the eleven shared tests, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus claims victory in every single instance, leaving the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U without a single head-to-head win. The scale of the disparity is substantial, with most deltas hovering between -92% and -96% from the perspective of the AMD part.

The largest gap appears in floating point math, where the Intel processor scores 159,824 against the Ryzen's 5,854, a delta of -96.3%. This indicates that workloads heavily reliant on floating point operations, such as scientific simulations or certain rendering tasks, would favor the Intel part overwhelmingly. Similarly, the prime number search test shows a -96% delta, with scores of 452 versus 18. This test often reflects raw integer throughput and memory latency handling, areas where the Intel architecture demonstrates a commanding lead.

Data encryption benchmarks show the Intel part scoring 41,292 against the Ryzen's 1,972, a delta of -95.2%. Encryption workloads frequently scale with core count and supported instruction sets, both of which favor the Intel processor. Extended instructions follow a similar pattern: 42,880 versus 2,116, a -95.1% delta. This test typically exercises SIMD and other specialized instruction paths, where the newer Intel design clearly excels.

In integer math, the Intel part scores 123,030 against 8,873, a delta of -92.8%. While this is one of the narrower deltas in the set, it still represents a massive performance gap. The multithread test shows a score of 50,146 for Intel and 3,348 for AMD, a -93.3% delta, which aligns with the significant difference in core and thread counts between the two parts.

The physics test, often tied to simulation and constraint solving, shows 3,183 versus 232, a -92.7% delta. Random string sorting shows 67,209 versus 4,666, a -93.1% delta, indicating a strong advantage in memory-intensive data manipulation tasks. Data compression shows 553,155 versus 38,455, a -93% delta, reinforcing the pattern of Intel dominance across the board.

The closest relative gap appears in single-thread performance. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus scores 4,698 in the single-thread test, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U scores 1,592, a delta of -66.1%. Although this is still a substantial deficit, it is notably smaller than the multi-threaded gaps. This suggests that while the Intel part's raw per-core capability is far superior, the architectural delta is less extreme when only one core is engaged. The single-thread score is also a key indicator for lightly threaded applications, such as older games or certain legacy productivity software, where the gap, while still large, is less punishing than in fully parallel workloads.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has an average benchmark score of 66,159, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has an average benchmark score of 6,247.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of overall CPU percentile ranking?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus sits in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, whereas the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U sits in the 62nd percentile.

Q: What is the closest rival to each processor according to the database?

A: For the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U, the closest rival is the AMD Ryzen Threadripper 1950X with a delta of 0.3%. For the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, the closest rival is the Intel Core 9 273PQE with a delta of 0.1%.

Q: In which test does the Intel processor show its smallest advantage over the AMD processor?

A: The smallest advantage is in the passmark single-thread test, where the Intel part leads by a delta of -66.1% (4,698 versus 1,592).

Q: Does the AMD processor have any benchmark where it scores higher than the Intel processor?

A: No. The recorded head-to-head data shows the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus winning all 11 shared benchmark tests.

Q: What is the difference in transistor count between the two processors?

A: The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 17,800 million transistors, while the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has 4,940 million transistors.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two processors is stark. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U is built on a 12 nm process node at GlobalFoundries, using the Picasso codename and belonging to the Zen+ (Picasso) generation. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus, by contrast, is fabricated on a 3 nm process node at TSMC, using the Arrow Lake Refresh codename within the Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake) generation. This process node difference is fundamental: the 12 nm node is multiple generations old, while 3 nm represents a leading-edge manufacturing technology.

The core configurations diverge sharply. The AMD part offers 2 cores and 2 threads, while the Intel part provides 18 cores and 18 threads. This nine-fold core difference and nine-fold thread difference directly explains the massive multi-threaded benchmark gaps. Cache hierarchies also differ: the AMD chip has 96 KB of L1 cache per core and 512 KB of L2 per core, with 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The Intel chip has 192 KB of L1 per core and a notably larger 3 MB of L2 per core, with 30 MB of shared L3 cache. The L3 cache difference alone, 4 MB versus 30 MB, is a 7.5-fold gap.

Memory architecture shows further divergence. The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U supports DDR4 memory with a measured bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus supports DDR5 with a bandwidth of 115.2 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses, but the DDR5 standard on the Intel platform offers significantly higher theoretical throughput. The Intel part also supports ECC memory, whereas the AMD part does not.

PCIe capabilities differ as well. The AMD processor uses Gen 3, while the Intel processor supports Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only). This represents a generational leap in interconnect bandwidth. Integrated graphics also separate the two: the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U includes Radeon Vega 8 graphics, while the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has no integrated graphics (N/A). This is a critical consideration for systems that require a discrete GPU.

The Intel part has an unlocked multiplier, indicating overclocking support, while the AMD part does not. Die sizes are 210 mm² for AMD and 243 mm² for Intel, despite the Intel part housing far more transistors, a direct consequence of the denser 3 nm process. Market segments also differ: the AMD part is designed for mobile platforms, while the Intel part is a desktop processor. The Intel part uses Intel Socket 1851, while the AMD part uses AMD Socket FP5.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every specification field in the database. Core count: the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U has 2 cores, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus has 18. Thread count: 2 versus 18. Base clock: 1.90 GHz for AMD, 4.20 GHz for Intel. Boost clock: 3.20 GHz for AMD, 5.30 GHz for Intel. TDP: 15 watts for AMD, 125 watts for Intel. Socket: AMD Socket FP5 versus Intel Socket 1851. Codename: Picasso versus Arrow Lake Refresh. Generation: Ryzen 3 (Zen+ (Picasso)) versus Ultra 5 (Arrow Lake). Process node: 12 nm versus 3 nm. Foundry: GlobalFoundries versus TSMC. Transistor count: 4,940 million versus 17,800 million. Die size: 210 mm² versus 243 mm².

Cache specifications differ per core and in shared capacity. L1 cache: 96 KB per core for AMD, 192 KB per core for Intel. L2 cache: 512 KB per core for AMD, 3 MB per core for Intel. L3 cache: 4 MB shared for AMD, 30 MB shared for Intel. Memory support: DDR4 versus DDR5. Memory bandwidth: 38.4 GB/s versus 115.2 GB/s. ECC memory support: false for AMD, true for Intel. PCIe: Gen 3 for AMD, Gen 5 with 20 lanes (CPU only) for Intel. Integrated graphics: Radeon Vega 8 for AMD, N/A for Intel. Market segment: Mobile versus Desktop. Multiplier unlocked: false for AMD, true for Intel. Release dates also differ, with the AMD part dated 2026-05-31 and the Intel part dated 2026-03-10.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus wins every benchmark category recorded in the head-to-head comparison. Its dominance spans data compression (553,155 versus 38,455), data encryption (41,292 versus 1,972), extended instructions (42,880 versus 2,116), prime number finding (452 versus 18), floating point math (159,824 versus 5,854), integer math (123,030 versus 8,873), multithread performance (50,146 versus 3,348), physics (3,183 versus 232), random string sorting (67,209 versus 4,666), and single-thread performance (4,698 versus 1,592).

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U does not win a single recorded test. However, the data does indicate areas where the relative gap is less severe. Single-thread performance shows a delta of -66.1%, which is the smallest margin across all tests. This is relevant for scenarios where only one core is actively used. Additionally, the AMD part's integrated Radeon Vega 8 graphics provides a visual output capability that the Intel part entirely lacks, given its N/A integrated graphics specification. This makes the AMD processor a plausible option for systems that cannot accommodate a discrete GPU.

The AMD part's TDP of 15 watts, versus the Intel part's 125 watts, indicates a significantly lower power envelope. This positions the AMD chip for mobile or low-power deployments. Its mobile market segment classification further reinforces this. The Intel part, with its desktop classification, high core count, and unlocked multiplier, is designed for maximum throughput and overclocking headroom.

The Verdict

The data presents a clear choice based on workload requirements. The Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the superior processor for virtually all compute-intensive tasks recorded in the database. Its 18 cores, 30 MB of L3 cache, DDR5 memory support, and 5.30 GHz boost clock enable it to outperform the AMD Ryzen 3 3100U by margins of 92% to 96% in most parallel workloads. The single-thread advantage of 66.1% still favors Intel decisively. The Intel part also ranks in the 93rd percentile of all CPUs, compared to the AMD part's 62nd percentile.

The AMD Ryzen 3 3100U is not without a role, but that role is defined by what the benchmark data does not measure: its 15-watt TDP, mobile market segment, and integrated graphics. For a lightweight mobile system that needs basic display output and modest computational capability, the AMD part offers a functional baseline. Its 2-core, 2-thread configuration and 4 MB of L3 cache place it in an entirely different performance class, as confirmed by the average benchmark scores of 6,247 versus 66,159.

For any workload requiring significant processing power, the Intel Core Ultra 5 250KF Plus is the only viable option based on the recorded data. Its launch MSRP is $184. The AMD processor has no recorded launch MSRP. The choice is ultimately between a low-power mobile processor with integrated graphics and a high-performance desktop processor with an unlocked multiplier, ECC memory support, and a 93rd percentile standing. The benchmark data, with all 11 wins going to Intel, makes the performance hierarchy unambiguous.