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 i3-10100Y review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£270PassMark multi-core score:2990N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:3.9 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1515TDP (Thermal design power):5 W

Intel Core i3-10100Y Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.0/10

Overall score

Score
6.0/ 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–¼ Worse than 77% of models
Score components

40%

4.0

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–¼Worse than 77% of processors
6.9

Value for money

Value for money
6.9/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

â–¼Worse than 75%
4.0

Technical score

Technical score
4.0/ 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–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components

60%

3.2

Performance

18%

4.6

Architecture

10%

3.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

6.9

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 86%
?

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~ £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 i3-10100Y

Technical score
Technical score
4.0/ 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–¼ Worse than 86% of models
Score components:

60%

3.2

Performance

18%

4.6

Architecture

10%

3.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.3

Power & Thermal

4%

6.9

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated graphics

4.0
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
6.9/ 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–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Score components:

70%

6.0

Overall score

30%

9.1

Price

6.9
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1515
This processor uses the FCBGA1515 CPU socket, which is older than that of 80.4% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
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
SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2
This processor supports SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 88.2% of processors and equal to that of 9.7% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
2
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 80.4% of processors and equal to 19.6% of processors.
CPU threads
4
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 69% of processors and equal to 25.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.9 GHz
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.9 GHz which is lower than that of 67% of processors and equal to that of 3.2% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.3 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.3 GHz which is lower than that of 97.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
2,990
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor scores 2,990 in PassMark, which is lower than 86.2% of processors and equal to 0.1% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 32.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to that of 29% of processors.
L3 cache
4 MB
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 4 MB which is smaller than that of 71.7% of processors and equal to that of 13.8% of processors.
L2 cache
0.5 MB
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 0.5 MB which is smaller than that of 85.4% of processors and equal to that of 14.5% of processors.
L1 cache
128 KB
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 128 KB which is smaller than that of 83.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.3% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR3L/LPDDR3
This processor supports DDR DDR3L/LPDDR3, which is older than that of 83.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
1,866 MHz
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,866 MHz, which is lower than that of 84.9% of processors and equal to 2.7% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR3-1866 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR3-1866 MHz, which is lower than that of 87.9% of processors and equal to 1.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
16 GB
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 16 GB of memory, which is less than 92.2% of processors and equal to 6.1% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 615
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 615 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 55.7% of processors and equal to that in 0.6% 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), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 79.1% of processors and equal to 0.7% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
5 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 5 W which is lower than that of 98.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
5 W
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 5 W which is lower than that of 98.7% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
7 W
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 7 W which is lower than that of 97.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% 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 i3-10100Y vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 4.59x faster Blender rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (1,825 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    1,825 vs 398.015
  • 88.9% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    5 W vs 45 W
  • 89.1% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (7 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    7 W vs 64 W
  • 88.9% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    5 W vs 45 W
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 4.59x faster Blender rendering
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (1,825 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    1,825 vs 398.015
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 88.9% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    5 W vs 45 W
  • 89.1% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (7 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    7 W vs 64 W
  • 88.9% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (5 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    5 W vs 45 W
  • 87.4% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (656 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    656 vs 5,209
  • 73.9% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (2,990 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    2,990 vs 11,469
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 80.9% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (536 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    536 vs 2,804.5
  • 34.1% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,685 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    1,685 vs 2,558
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 5.5% worse value for money
    Intel Core i3-10100Y has worse value for money than the average processor (6.91 vs 7.3).
    6.91 vs 7.29
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • More limited crypto acceleration
    This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1515 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1515 vs FP5
  • 87.4% lower multi-core score
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (656 vs 5,209). The average processor scores 5,209 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    656 vs 5,209
  • 73.9% lower PassMark score
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (2,990 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
    2,990 vs 11,469
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 80.9% weaker multi-core performance
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (536 vs 2,804.5). The average processor scores 2,804.5 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    536 vs 2,804.5
  • 34.1% weaker single-core performance
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,685 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
    1,685 vs 2,558
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.3 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 11.4% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.9 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • 2 fewer performance cores
    This processor has fewer performance cores than the average processor (2 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    2 vs 4
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 15 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (13 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    13 vs 28
  • 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
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    0.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • 16.7% larger process node
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 66.7% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (128 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    128 KB vs 384 KB
  • 55.6% smaller L3 cache
    This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (4 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    4 MB vs 9 MB
  • 41.7% lower memory speed
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,866 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
    1,866 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4, x2/x2, x2/x1/x1, x1/x1/x1/x1 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4, x2/x2, x2/x1/x1, x1/x1/x1/x1 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 6 fewer PCIe lanes
    This processor has fewer PCIe lanes than the average processor (10 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    10 vs 16
  • 29% lower memory bandwidth
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (33.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    33.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • Lower JEDEC memory speed
    This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR3-1866 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR3-1,866 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • Older DDR support
    This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3L/LPDDR3 vs DDR4).
    DDR3L/LPDDR3 vs DDR4
  • 75% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (16 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    16 GB vs 64 GB
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
  • No configurable TDP
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i3-10100Y

  • Extremely energy-efficient with a low 5W default TDP, making it ideal for fanless and portable devices
  • Reliable for basic day-to-day tasks like web browsing, emails, and video playback
  • Includes Hyper-Threading, allowing the dual-core processor to handle four threads simultaneously
  • Supports hardware decoding for modern video codecs like H.265/HEVC and VP9
  • Runs cool even in thin tablets and lightweight laptops

What customers don't like about Intel Core i3-10100Y

  • Limited performance with only two physical cores, making it unsuitable for demanding multitasking or productivity
  • Integrated Intel UHD Graphics 615 is weak for gaming, with most titles only playable at the lowest settings
  • Slower than modern entry-level alternatives like the Intel Processor N100
  • Performance is heavily dependent on the specific device's cooling and power limit (cTDP) configurations
  • Based on older 14nm Amber Lake architecture, leading to lower IPC compared to newer generations

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-10100Y is an ultra-low-power, dual-core mobile processor from the Amber Lake generation, featuring 2 cores, 4 threads, and a 4MB Intel Smart Cache. It operates at a base frequency of 1.30 GHz with a maximum turbo boost of 3.90 GHz and includes integrated Intel UHD Graphics 615. Its primary strengths are extreme energy efficiency, with a remarkably low 5W TDP that allows for fanless, passively cooled designs in tablets and thin laptops, and support for modern video codecs like VP9 and H.265. However, its main drawbacks include limited performance restricted to basic tasks like web browsing or office work, a low maximum memory support of 16GB, and its reliance on older 14nm lithography which lags behind more recent, higher-performance mobile architectures.

Compare Intel Core i3-10100Y 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 i3-10100Y and other processors

No results found