EPYC 4244P vs 3 100U
Aggregate performance score
EPYC 4244P outperforms Core 3 100U by an impressive 85% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 817 | 364 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | no data | 52.81 |
| Market segment | Laptop | Server |
| Series | Raptor Lake-U | no data |
| Power efficiency | 58.80 | 25.13 |
| Architecture codename | Raptor Lake-U Refresh (2024) | Raphael (2023−2024) |
| Release date | 8 January 2024 (less than a year ago) | 21 May 2024 (less than a year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $426 | $229 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 6 (Hexa-Core) | 6 (Hexa-Core) |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Base clock speed | 1.2 GHz | 3.8 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 4.7 GHz | 5.1 GHz |
| Bus rate | 55 MHz | no data |
| L1 cache | 80 KB (per core) | 64 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 1.25 MB (per core) | 1 MB (per core) |
| L3 cache | 10 MB (shared) | 32 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | Intel 7 nm | 5 nm |
| Die size | no data | 71 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | 100 °C | no data |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | no data | 61 °C |
| Number of transistors | no data | 6,570 million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | FCBGA1744 | AM5 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Speed Shift | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | + | - |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
| Flex Memory Access | + | no data |
| Precision Boost 2 | no data | + |
| Deep Learning Boost | + | - |
Security technologies
Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | - | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR5-5200, DDR4-3200, LPDDR4x-4267 | DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 96 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel® Graphics | AMD Radeon Graphics |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.25 GHz | no data |
| Execution Units | 64 | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 4 | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096 x 2304 @ 60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096 x 2304 @ 120Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 7680 x 4320 @ 60Hz | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12.1 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.6 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P.
| PCIe version | 4.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 8 | 28 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 9.32 | 17.26 |
| Recency | 8 January 2024 | 21 May 2024 |
| Threads | 8 | 12 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 15 Watt | 65 Watt |
3 100U has 333.3% lower power consumption.
EPYC 4244P, on the other hand, has a 85.2% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 4 months, and 50% more threads.
The EPYC 4244P is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 3 100U in performance tests.
Be aware that Core 3 100U is a notebook processor while EPYC 4244P is a server/workstation one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core 3 100U and EPYC 4244P, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
