OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i3 1215U Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£380PassMark benchmark result:10215N. of physical cores:6CPU boost clock speed:4.4 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1744TDP (Thermal design power):15 W

Intel Core i3 1215U Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

5.7

Overall score

Score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 50% of models
Score components

90%

5.7

Technical score

10%

?

User score

â–²Better than 50% of processors
5.7

Technical score

Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 52% of models
Score components

60%

4.6

Performance

18%

6.9

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.8

Integrated Graphics

â–²Better than 52% of processors
?

User score

User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

  • No image
No image

Best prices

    N/A~ £380

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 1215U

Technical score
Technical score
5.7/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 52% of models
Score components:

60%

4.6

Performance

18%

6.9

Cache & Architecture

10%

7.1

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.0

Power & Thermal

4%

8.5

Platform

1%

7.8

Integrated Graphics

5.7
User score
User score
8.0/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 91% of models
Score components

70%

?

User ratings

30%

?

Number of reviews

?
Popularity
Popularity
1.0/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i3 1215U has a popularity score of 1 point, which is higher than that of 0% of products in this category.
1.0
Value for money
Value for money
6.5/ 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 55% of models
Score components:

60%

5.7

Overall score

40%

8.5

Price

6.5
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
mobile
Processor type
mobile
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 7.3% of processors and equal to that of 48.6% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
CPU socket
FCBGA1744
â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
This processor uses the FCBGA1744 CPU socket, which is older than that of 71.8% of processors and equal to that of 5% of processors.
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680, R680E
Chipset
Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680, R680E
â–² Better than 89% of models
This processor supports Z790, H770, B760, Z690, H670, B660, H610, Q670, W680, R680E chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 88.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
6
N. of physical cores
6
â–² Better than 50% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 6 CPU cores, which is more than 49.9% of processors and equal to 13.4% of processors.
CPU threads
8
CPU threads
8
â–¼ Worse than 46% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 8 CPU threads, which is more than 35.2% of processors and equal to 19.1% of processors.
Threads per core
?
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
CPU boost clock speed
4.4 GHz
â–² Better than 51% of models
Market range: <3 GHz – >5.5 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 4.4 GHz which is higher than that of 51.2% of processors and equal to that of 5.1% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.2 GHz & 4x 0.9 GHz
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.2 GHz & 4x 0.9 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.2 GHz & 4x0.9 GHz which is lower than that of 82.9% of processors and equal to that of 0.3% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
Semiconductor size
10 nm
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 52.4% of processors and equal to that of 19.1% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 7
Foundry
Intel 7
â–² Better than 66% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 7 foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 66.2% of processors and equal to that of 14.9% of processors.
L3 cache
10 MB
L3 cache
10 MB
â–² Better than 54% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 10 MB which is larger than that of 53.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
L2 cache
5 MB
L2 cache
5 MB
â–² Better than 65% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 5 MB which is larger than that of 64.8% of processors and equal to that of 2.5% of processors.
L1 cache
544 KB
L1 cache
544 KB
â–² Better than 73% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 544 KB which is larger than that of 73.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
DDR memory version
DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
★ Better than 96% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5, which is newer than that of 95.7% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
5,200 MHz
Maximum memory speed
5,200 MHz
â–² Better than 72% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 5,200 MHz, which is higher than that of 72.3% of processors and equal to 6.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-5200 MHz
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR5-5200 MHz
â–² Better than 70% of models
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR5-5200 MHz, which is higher than that of 70.2% of processors and equal to 2% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 64EU
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 64EU
â–¼ Worse than 60% of models
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 64EU integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 60.5% of processors and equal to that in 0.7% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
64
Integrated GPU execution units
64
â–² Better than 87% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 64 GPU execution units, which is more than 87.4% of processors and equal to 3.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 58% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 58.1% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
Integrated media encoders/decoders
VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
â–² Better than 51% of models
This processor supports VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 50.6% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
15 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
15 W
â–² Better than 78% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 15 W which is lower than that of 78% of processors and equal to that of 16% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
15 W
Base power (PL1)
15 W
â–² Better than 77% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 15 W which is lower than that of 77.2% of processors and equal to that of 16.3% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
55 W
Boost power (PL2)
55 W
â–² Better than 57% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a boost power of 55 W which is lower than that of 56.6% of processors and equal to that of 6.5% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
â–¼ Worse than 10% of models
Market range: <8 seconds – >28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 3.4% of processors and equal to that of 86.1% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
Configurable TDP
yes
â–² Better than 47% of models
This processor supports configurable TDP. 47.3% of processors support configurable TDP.
cTDP: 12 W
Show more

Intel Core i3 1215U vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Alder Lake
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1.25 MB/core
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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.
    E-core cluster: 2 MB shared by 4 cores
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    4.0
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • Uses big.LITTLE design
    big.LITTLE Architecture
    yes
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, the average processor does not. 20.5% of processors use a big.LITTLE design.
  • 25.5% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,138
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,138 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,138 vs 2,500
  • 66.7% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    15 W
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    20
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT
    â–² Better than 65% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TDT vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Includes crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA
    â–² Better than 84% of models
    This processor includes crypto acceleration, the average processor does not. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES, SHA, RSA/PKA vs AES, SHA
  • Supports HMP
    Uses HMP
    yes
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    This processor supports HMP, the average processor does not. 22.7% of processors support HMP.
  • 25.5% better single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    3,138
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a higher PassMark single-core score than the average processor (3,138 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    3,138 vs 2,500
  • 22.8% higher single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,807
    â–² Better than 63% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,807 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,807 vs 1,471
  • 19% higher Cinebench R20 single-core score
    Cinebench R20 single-core benchmark score
    582
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    Market range: <282 – >775
    This processor has a higher Cinebench R20 single-core score than the average processor (582 vs 489). The average processor scores 489 in Cinebench R20 single-core.
    582 vs 489
  • 27.5% higher multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    6,158
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a higher Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (6,158 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    6,158 vs 4,829
  • 2 wider front-end design
    Front-end width
    6
    â–² Better than 67% of models
    Market range: <2 – >7
    This processor has a higher front-end width than the average processor (6 vs 4). The average processor uses front-end width of 4.
    P-core 6, E-core 3
    6 vs 4
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Alder Lake
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Alder Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 2.5x more L2 per core
    L2 per core
    1.25 MB/core
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/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.
    E-core cluster: 2 MB shared by 4 cores
    1.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • Uses big.LITTLE design
    big.LITTLE Architecture
    yes
    â–² Better than 80% of models
    This processor uses a big.LITTLE design, the average processor does not. 20.5% of processors use a big.LITTLE design.
  • More advanced foundry
    Foundry
    Intel 7
    â–² Better than 66% of models
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 7 vs Intel 14 nm
  • 2x larger L2 cache
    L2 cache
    5 MB
    â–² Better than 65% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a higher L2 cache than the average processor (5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    5 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 41.7% larger L1 cache
    L1 cache
    544 KB
    â–² Better than 73% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has a higher L1 cache than the average processor (544 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    544 KB vs 384 KB
  • 16.7% smaller process node
    Semiconductor size
    10 nm
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a lower process node than the average processor (10 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    10 nm vs 12 nm
  • Newer DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5
    ★ Better than 96% of models
    This processor supports a newer DDR generation than the average processor (DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4).
    DDR4/DDR5/LPDDR4X/LPDDR5 vs DDR4
  • Newer PCIe version
    PCIe version
    4.0
    â–² Better than 62% of models
    This processor supports a newer PCIe version than the average processor (4 vs 3).
    4.0 vs 3.0
  • 4 more PCIe lanes
    PCIe lane count
    20
    â–² Better than 58% of models
    Market range: <10 – >30
    This processor has more PCIe lanes than the average processor (20 vs 16). The average processor offers 16 PCIe lanes.
    20 vs 16
  • 77.3% higher memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    5,200 MHz
    â–² Better than 72% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a higher maximum memory speed than the average processor (5200 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    5,200 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Higher JEDEC memory speed
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    LPDDR5-5200 MHz
    â–² Better than 70% of models
    This processor has a higher JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (LPDDR5-5200 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
    LPDDR5-5,200 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
  • 2.67x more GPU execution units
    Integrated GPU execution units
    64
    â–² Better than 87% of models
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has more GPU execution units than the average processor (64 vs 24). The average processor has 24 GPU execution units.
    64 vs 24
  • 1 more supported displays
    Maximum supported displays
    4
    â–² Better than 56% of models
    Market range: <1 – >6
    This processor has more supported displays than the average processor (4 vs 3). The average processor supports 3 displays.
    4 vs 3
  • 66.7% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    15 W
    â–² Better than 77% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 66.7% lower TDP
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    15 W
    â–² Better than 78% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (15 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    15 W vs 45 W
  • 89.9% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    283
    â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (283 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    283 vs 2,791
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    2 x 1.2 GHz & 4 x 0.9 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.2 GHz & 4x0.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    2x1.2 GHz & 4x0.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 77.1% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    76.41
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (76.4 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    76.41 vs 334.1
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • 52% more expensive
    Intel Core i3 1215U is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • 16 lower clock multiplier
    Clock multiplier
    12
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <16 – >38
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (12 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    12 vs 28
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1744
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP4
  • 52% more expensive
    Intel Core i3 1215U is more expensive than the average processor (£380 vs £250).
    £380 vs £250
  • Older CPU socket
    CPU socket
    FCBGA1744
    â–¼ Worse than 72% of models
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1744 vs FP4).
    FCBGA1744 vs FP4
  • 89.9% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    283
    â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (283 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    283 vs 2,791
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    2 x 1.2 GHz & 4 x 0.9 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.2 GHz & 4x0.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    2x1.2 GHz & 4x0.9 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • 77.1% slower classroom rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    76.41
    Category Benchmark
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a higher Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (76.4 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
    76.41 vs 334.1
  • 16 lower clock multiplier
    Clock multiplier
    12
    â–¼ Worse than 95% of models
    Market range: <16 – >38
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (12 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    12 vs 28
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
    â–² Better than 51% of models
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)

Video reviews

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

Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet
Not graded yet

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i3 1215U

  • Excellent single-core performance for its price bracket
  • Smooth performance for everyday tasks like web browsing, office work, and school assignments
  • Significant performance leap over previous 11th Gen i3 and older i7 processors
  • Highly energy-efficient, making it ideal for thin and light laptops
  • Capable of handling light gaming (e.g., Minecraft, Stardew Valley, and older eSports titles)
  • Supports modern standards like DDR5 memory and PCIe 4.0

What we don't like about Intel Core i3 1215U

  • Limited to 2 Performance cores (P-cores), which can lead to bottlenecks in heavy multi-threaded tasks
  • Integrated UHD graphics are weak compared to AMD Ryzen counterparts or Apple M1/M2 chips
  • Performance drops significantly when paired with single-channel RAM
  • Not suitable for demanding professional workloads like heavy video editing or 3D rendering
  • Some users report the fan can become loud or frequent due to limited cooling in budget chassis

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-1215U is a 12th Gen 'Alder Lake' mobile processor featuring a hybrid architecture with 6 cores (2 Performance-cores and 4 Efficient-cores) and 8 threads, reaching a max turbo frequency of 4.40 GHz. It includes 10 MB of Intel Smart Cache, integrated Intel UHD Graphics with 64 execution units, and supports modern memory types like DDR5-4800 and LPDDR5-5200. Main pros include a significant performance leap over previous generations, excellent single-core speed for daily productivity, and low power consumption with a 15W base TDP suitable for thin laptops. Cons include limited multi-core performance for heavy workloads like video editing or compiling, and potential thermal throttling in poorly cooled devices that restricts sustained high-frequency operation.

Compare Intel Core i3 1215U 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 1215U and other processors

No results found