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 201E review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£150PassMark multi-core score:14840N. of physical cores:4CPU boost clock speed:4.8 GHzCPU socket:LGA1700TDP (Thermal design power):60 W

Intel Core 3 201E Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

7.1/10

Overall score

Score
7.1/ 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 62% of models
Score components

40%

6.7

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

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 62% of processors
7.9

Value for money

Value for money
7.9/ 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 81% of models
Score components

70%

7.1

Overall score

30%

9.7

Price

â–²Better than 81%
6.7

Technical score

Technical score
6.7/ 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 64% of models
Score components

60%

6.2

Performance

18%

6.7

Architecture

10%

8.2

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.1

Power & Thermal

4%

8.7

Platform

1%

7.7

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 64%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
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
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

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~ £150
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 201E

    Technical score
    Technical score
    6.7/ 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 64% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    6.2

    Performance

    18%

    6.7

    Architecture

    10%

    8.2

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    7.1

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    8.7

    Platform

    1%

    7.7

    Integrated graphics

    6.7
    Reviews score
    7.2
    List score
    ?
    Value for money
    Value for money
    7.9/ 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 81% of models
    Score components:

    70%

    7.1

    Overall score

    30%

    9.7

    Price

    7.9
    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.
    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
    H610, Q670, W680, R680E, Q670E, H610E
    This processor supports H610, Q670, W680, R680E, Q670E, H610E chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 83.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% 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
    MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES
    This processor supports MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is narrower support than 74.8% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    4
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 4 CPU cores, which is fewer than 52.8% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
    CPU threads
    8
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 33.4% of processors and equal to 18.8% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    4.8 GHz
    Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
    This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.8 GHz which is higher than that of 69.2% of processors and equal to that of 4.4% of processors.
    CPU base clock speed
    4x 3.6 GHz
    This processor has a base clock of 4x3.6 GHz which is higher than that of 50.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
    PassMark multi-core score
    14,840
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor scores 14,840 in PassMark, which is higher than 58.3% 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
    5 MB
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has an L2 cache of 5 MB which is larger than that of 62.9% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
    L1 cache
    320 KB
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 320 KB which is smaller than that of 56.1% of processors and equal to that of 4.2% 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
    4,800 MHz
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor supports memory speeds up to 4,800 MHz, which is higher than that of 64.6% of processors and equal to 6% of processors.
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    ?
    Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
    ?
    Maximum memory capacity
    192 GB
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
    This processor supports up to 192 GB of memory, which is more than 82.2% of processors and equal to 6.8% of processors.
    Show more
    Integrated graphics
    yes
    This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel UHD Graphics 730
    This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 730 integrated GPU, which is more advanced than that in 54.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.1% of processors.
    Integrated GPU execution units
    24
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.1% of processors and equal to 20.8% of processors.
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    300 MHz
    Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
    This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
    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)
    60 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a TDP of 60 W which is higher than that of 67.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
    Base power (PL1)
    60 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a base power of 60 W which is higher than that of 67.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
    Boost power (PL2)
    60 W
    Market range: <25 W – >150 W
    This processor has a boost power of 60 W which is lower than that of 53.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
    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
    no
    This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
    Show more

    Intel Core 3 201E vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
      5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
      Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
    • 36.1% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,482 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,482 vs 2,558
    • 2.5x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • 58.2% higher multi-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,242 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
      8,242 vs 5,209
    • 3x more memory capacity
      This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
      192 GB vs 64 GB
    • 62.2% more L3 per core
      This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
    • Includes a cooler
      This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
    • 7.9% better value for money
      Intel Core 3 201E has better value for money than the average processor (7.86 vs 7.3).
      7.86 vs 7.29
    • Modern CPU socket
      This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1700 vs FP5).
      LGA1700 vs FP5
    • 5 years newer release date
      This processor has a newer release date than the average processor (2025 vs 2020).
      2025 vs 2020
    • More extensive crypto acceleration
      This processor offers more extensive crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA).
      AES, SHA, PCLMULQDQ vs AES, SHA
    • 36.1% better single-core performance
      This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,482 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      3,482 vs 2,558
    • 58.2% higher multi-core score
      This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (8,242 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
      8,242 vs 5,209
    • 9.1% higher boost clock
      This processor has a higher boost clock speed than the average processor (4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
      4.8 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
    • 29.4% higher PassMark score
      This processor has a higher PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (14,840 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      14,840 vs 11,469
    • More advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake).
      Raptor Lake vs Kaby Lake
    • 2.5x more L2 per core
      This processor has more L2 cache per core than the average processor (1.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
      1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
    • 62.2% more L3 per core
      This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
      3 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
    • 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
    • 66.7% larger L2 cache
      This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
      5 MB vs 3 MB
    • Newer PCIe version
      This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (5 + 4 vs 3).
      5.0 + 4.0 vs 3.0
    • 3x more memory capacity
      This processor has more maximum memory capacity than the average processor (192 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
      192 GB vs 64 GB
    • 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
    • Supports ECC memory
      This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
    • 50% higher memory speed
      This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (4,800 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
      4,800 MHz vs 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
    • Includes a cooler
      This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
    • 2 fewer CPU cores
      This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      4 vs 6
    • No configurable TDP
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 33.3% higher base power
      This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      60 W vs 45 W
    • 33.3% higher TDP
      This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
      60 W vs 45 W
    • Narrower instruction support
      This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 2 fewer CPU cores
      This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (4 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
      4 vs 6
    • No configurable TDP
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • 33.3% higher base power
      This processor has a higher base power draw than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
      60 W vs 45 W
    • 33.3% higher TDP
      This processor has a higher TDP than the average processor (60 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
      60 W vs 45 W

    Third-party reviews

    What customers like about Intel Core 3 201E

    • High single-thread performance (3.6 GHz base, 4.8 GHz turbo)
    • Supports modern DDR5 4800 MT/s and high maximum RAM (192 GB)
    • Supports PCIe 5.0 for high-speed connectivity
    • Supports ECC memory, making it suitable for stable embedded and workstation use
    • Strong performance compared to previous budget tiers (approx. 14% faster in multi-threaded tests than i5-1235U)
    • Decent integrated graphics (Intel UHD 730/770) capable of driving 4 displays

    What customers don't like about Intel Core 3 201E

    • Relatively high power consumption (60W TDP) compared to typical low-power laptop chips
    • Limited core count (4 performance cores, 0 efficient cores) compared to modern hybrid architectures
    • Locked multiplier prevents manual overclocking for performance enthusiasts
    • Market positioning as an 'entry-level' chip may limit its longevity for high-end AI or gaming workloads

    Verdict

    The Intel Core 3 201E is an embedded-class processor from the Series 2 family, launched in early 2025, featuring 4 performance cores and 8 threads with a base frequency of 3.6 GHz and a max turbo speed of 4.8 GHz. It is equipped with 12 MB of Intel Smart Cache, supports up to 192 GB of DDR5-4800 or DDR4-3200 memory, and includes integrated Intel UHD Graphics 730 with 24 execution units. Main pros include its support for ECC memory, compatibility with PCIe 5.0 and 4.0, and a relatively high turbo frequency for its class, making it suitable for reliable multitasking and business applications. Notable cons include its lack of efficient cores (E-cores), a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, and a 60W base power consumption which may be high for strictly mobile-focused applications.

    Compare Intel Core 3 201E 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 201E and other processors

    No results found