OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core 3 100HL review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£270PassMark multi-core score:17586N. of physical cores:8CPU boost clock speed:4.6 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):45 W

Intel Core 3 100HL Review: Compare 74 technical specifications and 1 expert and video reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.3/10

Overall score

Score
7.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 70% of models
Score components

40%

7.2

Technical score

25%

7.2

Reviews score

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 70% of processors
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 77% of models
Score components

70%

7.3

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

â–²Better than 77%
7.2

Technical score

Technical score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 72% of models
Score components

60%

7.1

Performance

18%

7.0

Architecture

10%

7.5

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.2

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

9.2

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 72%
7.2

Reviews score

Reviews score
7.2/ 10
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models

7.2

Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

80%

7.9

Average grade

20%

5.0

Popularity

Grades by review (1)
1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
â–¼Worse than 59%
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £270
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
    Loading category ranking...

    Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core 3 100HL

    Technical score
    Technical score
    7.2/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
    How we count it
    Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
    Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
    Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    7.1

    Performance

    18%

    7.0

    Architecture

    10%

    7.5

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    7.2

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    8.5

    Platform

    1%

    9.2

    Integrated graphics

    7.2
    Reviews score
    7.2
    List score
    ?
    Value for money
    Value for money
    7.8/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
    When it matters
    When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Score components:

    70%

    7.3

    Overall score

    30%

    9.1

    Price

    7.8
    Processor type
    embedded
    This processor belongs to the embedded processor class, which is less advanced than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.9% of processors.
    industrial/edge
    CPU socket
    LGA1700
    This processor uses the LGA1700 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 84.5% of processors and equal to that of 8.4% of processors.
    Chipset
    Z690, H670, B660, H610
    This processor supports Z690, H670, B660, H610 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 81.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
    CPU architecture
    x86-64
    This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
    Instruction sets
    SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3
    This processor supports SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 70.9% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    8
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 8 CPU cores, which is more than 61.2% of processors and equal to 13.9% of processors.
    CPU threads
    12
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 12 CPU threads, which is more than 53% of processors and equal to 14.2% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.6 GHz
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.6 GHz which is higher than that of 59.9% of processors and equal to that of 4.7% of processors.
    CPU base clock speed
    4x 2.1 GHz & 4x 1.5 GHz
    This processor has a base clock of 4x2.1 GHz & 4x1.5 GHz which is higher than that of 50.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
    PassMark multi-core score
    17,586
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor scores 17,586 in PassMark, which is higher than 63.4% of processors.
    Show more
    Semiconductor size
    10 nm
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
    Foundry
    Intel 7
    This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 15.7% of processors.
    L3 cache
    12 MB
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has an L3 cache of 12 MB which is larger than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 9.3% of processors.
    L2 cache
    7 MB
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has an L2 cache of 7 MB which is larger than that of 70.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.2% of processors.
    L1 cache
    704 KB
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 704 KB which is larger than that of 77% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
    Show more
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/DDR5
    This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5, which is newer than that of 77.1% of processors and equal to that of 10.7% of processors.
    Maximum memory speed
    5,200 MHz
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 70.6% of processors and equal to 6.6% of processors.
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    DDR5-5200 MHz
    This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to DDR5-5200 MHz, which is higher than that of 71% of processors and equal to 5.6% of processors.
    Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
    ?
    Maximum memory capacity
    96 GB
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor supports up to 96 GB of memory, which is more than 53.4% of processors and equal to 5.8% of processors.
    Show more
    Integrated graphics
    yes
    This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel Iris Xe Graphics 48EU
    This processor uses the Intel Iris Xe Graphics 48EU integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 78.3% of processors and equal to that in 0.1% of processors.
    Integrated GPU execution units
    48
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has 48 GPU execution units, which is more than 82.1% of processors and equal to 4.5% of processors.
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    ?
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
    This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 85.4% of processors and equal to 5.4% of processors.
    Show more
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    45 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a TDP of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 10.8% of processors.
    Base power (PL1)
    45 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a base power of 45 W which is lower than that of 41.9% of processors and equal to that of 11% of processors.
    Boost power (PL2)
    ?
    Tau (power duration limit)
    28 seconds
    Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
    This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
    Configurable TDP
    yes
    This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
    Show more

    Intel Core 3 100HL vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
    • 46% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,735 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,735 vs 2,558
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
      Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
    • 4x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • 53.3% higher PassMark score
      This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,586 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      17,586 vs 11,469
    • Mixed big and small cores
      This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
      4 vs 3
    • Newer DDR support
      This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
      DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
    • 4 more PCIe lanes
      This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
      20 vs 16
    • 7.5% higher review score
      Reviews score
      7.2/ 10
      ✕
      What it is
      Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
      How we count it
      Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
      Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
      Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
      Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
      Score distribution
      â–¼
      <55-66-77-88-99-10
      â–¼ Worse than 59% of models

      7.2

      Mark 7.3 is below the typical mark 7.6 of this category, so it cannot lift the score above the technical score

      80%

      7.9

      Average grade

      20%

      5.0

      Popularity

      Grades by review (1)
      1 video review, counting half as much as a written test. Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
      User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
      7.2 vs 6.7
    • Modern CPU socket
      This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
      LGA1700 vs FP5
    • 4 years newer release date
      This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2024 vs 2020).
      April 2024
      2024 vs 2020
    • Supports heterogeneous scheduling
      This processor uses heterogeneous multi-processing, while the average processor does not. 24.8% of processors use it.
    • 46% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,735 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,735 vs 2,558
    • 53.3% higher PassMark score
      This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (17,586 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      17,586 vs 11,469
    • 2 more CPU cores
      This processor has more CPU cores than the average processor (8 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      8 vs 6
    • 4 more CPU threads
      This processor has more CPU threads than the average processor (12 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
      12 vs 8
    • 4.5% higher boost clock
      This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      4.6 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake).
      Raptor Lake Refresh vs Kaby Lake
    • 4x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      2 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • Mixed big and small cores
      This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, while the average processor does not. 22.6% of processors use one.
    • 2.33x larger L2 cache
      This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (7 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
      7 MB vs 3 MB
    • More advanced foundry
      This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
      Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
    • 83.3% larger L1 cache
      This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (704 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
      704 KB vs 384 KB
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
      4 vs 3
    • Newer DDR support
      This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4).
      DDR4/DDR5 vs DDR4
    • 4 more PCIe lanes
      This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
      20 vs 16
    • 62.5% higher memory speed
      This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
      5,200 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
    • 50% more memory capacity
      This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (96 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
      96 GB vs 64 GB
    • Higher JEDEC memory speed
      This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR5-5200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
      DDR5-5,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
    • 1 more supported displays
      This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
      4 vs 3
    • Better integrated GPU
      This processor uses a better integrated GPU than the average processor (Intel Iris Xe Graphics 48EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
      Intel Iris Xe Graphics 48EU vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
    • 2x more GPU execution units
      This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (48 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
      48 vs 24
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 18.9% less L3 per core
      This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
    • 50% lower bus transfer rate
      This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
      4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
    • 7 lower clock multiplier
      This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (21 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
      21 vs 28
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 50% lower bus transfer rate
      This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
      4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
    • 7 lower clock multiplier
      This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (21 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
      21 vs 28
    • 18.9% less L3 per core
      This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      1.5 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core

    Video reviews

    Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

    9.0
    L'angolo di Marco
    ≈ estimated
    16/10/2026
    Hands-on review · unboxing, setup and benchmark tests
    Verdict
    Intel Core 3 100HL is a solid mini PC for work, with good value for the hardware.

    Third-party reviews

    What customers like about Intel Core 3 100HL

    • Efficient hybrid architecture with 4 Performance-cores and 4 Efficient-cores (8 total cores/12 threads)
    • Strong single-core performance with a max turbo frequency of 4.6 GHz
    • Supports modern memory standards including DDR5 up to 5200 MT/s
    • Integrated Intel Graphics with 48 execution units suitable for light multitasking and media
    • Generous 12 MB L3 cache which aids in faster data access for general office productivity
    • High maximum memory support of up to 96 GB for an entry-level series

    What customers don't like about Intel Core 3 100HL

    • Higher power consumption (45W base TDP) compared to 'U' series ultra-portable models
    • Locked multiplier prevents easy overclocking for enthusiasts
    • Limited gaming performance for modern AAA titles compared to higher-tier Core 5 or 7 chips
    • Integrated graphics are less powerful than higher-end variants with more execution units (e.g., Core 5 130HL)
    • May experience thermal throttling under heavy sustained loads due to the 115W maximum turbo power

    Verdict

    The Intel Core 3 100HL is a mobile/embedded processor launched in early 2024, featuring a hybrid architecture with 8 total cores (4 Performance-cores and 4 Efficient-cores) and 12 threads. It operates at a base frequency of 2.1 GHz on its P-cores, reaching a max turbo frequency of 4.6 GHz, and is equipped with a 12 MB Intel Smart Cache. Key advantages include its efficient 10nm lithography, support for high-speed DDR5 memory up to 5200 MHz, and integrated Intel Graphics with 48 execution units, making it highly capable for multitasking and mid-range productivity. However, notable drawbacks include its relatively high maximum turbo power of 115W for a mobile chip, which may present thermal challenges in thin designs, and its lack of an unlocked multiplier for overclocking.

    Compare Intel Core 3 100HL with other processors

    1Product to compare no. 1
    VS
    2Product to compare no. 2
    VS
    3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

    Graphic comparison of Intel Core 3 100HL and other processors

    No results found