PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core 3 100HL

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $3 less on MSRP ($306 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 125W, a 80W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (17,586 vs 58,789).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.5 vs 190.3 PassMark/$ ($306 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core Ultra 7 265K

2024

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Delivers 231.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 190.3 vs 57.5 PassMark/$ ($309 MSRP vs $306 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Graphics 64EU, while Core 3 100HL needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
1% HIGHER MSRP
$309 MSRPvs$306 MSRP
❌177.8% higher power demand at 125W vs 45W.

Core 3 100HL

2024

Core Ultra 7 265K

2024

Why buy it

✅Costs $3 less on MSRP ($306 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
✅Draws 45W instead of 125W, a 80W reduction.

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +41.8% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
✅+150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).
✅Delivers 231.0% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 190.3 vs 57.5 PassMark/$ ($309 MSRP vs $306 MSRP).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (20 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with Arc Graphics 64EU, while Core 3 100HL needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core Ultra 7 265K across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.
❌Lower PassMark (17,586 vs 58,789).
❌Smaller total L3 cache (12 MB vs 30 MB).
❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 57.5 vs 190.3 PassMark/$ ($306 MSRP vs $309 MSRP).
❌No integrated graphics, while Core Ultra 7 265K can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌
1% HIGHER MSRP
$309 MSRPvs$306 MSRP
❌177.8% higher power demand at 125W vs 45W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core Ultra 7 265K better than Core 3 100HL?

Yes. Core Ultra 7 265K is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 41.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 234.3% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core Ultra 7 265K is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 41.8% more average FPS across 50 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core Ultra 7 265K is the better fit. You are getting 234.3% better PassMark, backed by 20 cores and 20 threads. It also carries the larger cache pool with 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB).

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core Ultra 7 265K is the smarter buy today. Core Ultra 7 265K is 1.0% more expensive on MSRP at $309 MSRP versus $306 MSRP, and it gives you a 41.8% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 231.0% better value on MSRP (190.3 vs 57.5 PassMark/$), so the better CPU is not just faster, it is also the cleaner value play on paper. That said, if you already own a compatible LGA1700 + DDR5 setup, Core 3 100HL can still make sense as a platform-matched option because it avoids a motherboard and RAM swap.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core Ultra 7 265K is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 150% larger total L3 cache (30 MB vs 12 MB) and more multi-core headroom with 20 cores / 20 threads instead of 8/12. That should give you a better long-term upgrade path for motherboard, RAM, and future CPU swaps.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core 3 100HL Benchmark Check

Core Ultra 7 265K Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
1080p
low	177 FPS	305 FPS
medium	144 FPS	290 FPS
high	119 FPS	244 FPS
ultra	97 FPS	205 FPS
1440p
low	144 FPS	240 FPS
medium	114 FPS	201 FPS
high	94 FPS	163 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	142 FPS
4K
low	79 FPS	158 FPS
medium	68 FPS	132 FPS
high	54 FPS	102 FPS
ultra	43 FPS	89 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Core Ultra 7 265K

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
1080p
low	201 FPS	778 FPS
medium	171 FPS	656 FPS
high	155 FPS	548 FPS
ultra	136 FPS	491 FPS
1440p
low	177 FPS	673 FPS
medium	155 FPS	595 FPS
high	143 FPS	499 FPS
ultra	123 FPS	422 FPS
4K
low	138 FPS	395 FPS
medium	125 FPS	357 FPS
high	118 FPS	335 FPS
ultra	102 FPS	292 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Core Ultra 7 265K

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
1080p
low	440 FPS	851 FPS
medium	440 FPS	694 FPS
high	440 FPS	617 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	528 FPS
1440p
low	440 FPS	731 FPS
medium	440 FPS	599 FPS
high	440 FPS	521 FPS
ultra	387 FPS	442 FPS
4K
low	439 FPS	517 FPS
medium	350 FPS	436 FPS
high	312 FPS	396 FPS
ultra	246 FPS	337 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Core Ultra 7 265K

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
1080p
low	440 FPS	1128 FPS
medium	440 FPS	1015 FPS
high	440 FPS	889 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	808 FPS
1440p
low	440 FPS	892 FPS
medium	440 FPS	789 FPS
high	440 FPS	687 FPS
ultra	440 FPS	611 FPS
4K
low	440 FPS	604 FPS
medium	440 FPS	542 FPS
high	440 FPS	489 FPS
ultra	391 FPS	432 FPS

Open Core 3 100HL Open Core Ultra 7 265K

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core 3 100HL and Core Ultra 7 265K

Core 3 100HL

The Core 3 100HL is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 April 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture. It features 8 cores and 12 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 4.6 GHz. L3 cache: 12 MB (total). L2 cache: 2 MB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1700. Thermal design power (TDP): 45 Watt. Memory support: DDR4, DDR5. Passmark benchmark score: 17,586 points. Launch price was $299.

Core Ultra 7 265K

The Core Ultra 7 265K is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 24 October 2024 (1 year ago). It is based on the Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) architecture. It features 20 cores and 20 threads. Base frequency is 3.9 GHz, with boost up to 5.5 GHz. L3 cache: 30 MB (total). L2 cache: 3 MB (per core). Built on 3 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1851. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR5-6400. Passmark benchmark score: 58,789 points. Launch price was $394.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core 3 100HL packs 8 cores / 12 threads, while the Core Ultra 7 265K offers 20 cores / 20 threads — the Core Ultra 7 265K has 12 more cores. Boost clocks reach 4.6 GHz on the Core 3 100HL versus 5.5 GHz on the Core Ultra 7 265K — a 17.8% clock advantage for the Core Ultra 7 265K (base: 2.1 GHz vs 3.9 GHz). The Core 3 100HL uses the Raptor Lake-PS (2024) architecture (10 nm), while the Core Ultra 7 265K uses Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025) (3 nm). In PassMark, the Core 3 100HL scores 17,586 against the Core Ultra 7 265K's 58,789 — a 107.9% lead for the Core Ultra 7 265K. L3 cache: 12 MB (total) on the Core 3 100HL vs 30 MB (total) on the Core Ultra 7 265K.

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
Cores / Threads	8 / 12	20 / 20+150%
Boost Clock	4.6 GHz	5.5 GHz+20%
Base Clock	2.1 GHz	3.9 GHz+86%
L3 Cache	12 MB (total)	30 MB (total)+150%
L2 Cache	2 MB (per core)	3 MB (per core)+50%
Process	10 nm	3 nm-70%
Architecture	Raptor Lake-PS (2024)	Arrow Lake-S (2024−2025)
PassMark	17,586	58,789+234%
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	36,309
Geekbench 6 Single	—	3,283
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	22,293

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core 3 100HL uses the LGA1700 socket (PCIe 5.0), while the Core Ultra 7 265K uses LGA1851 (PCIe 5.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
Socket	LGA1700	LGA1851
PCIe Generation	PCIe 5.0	PCIe 5.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR5-6400
Max RAM Capacity	—	256 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	20

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core 3 100HL) / VT-x, VT-d (Core Ultra 7 265K). The Core Ultra 7 265K includes integrated graphics (Arc Graphics 64EU), while the Core 3 100HL requires a dedicated GPU.

Feature	Core 3 100HL	Core Ultra 7 265K
Integrated GPU	—	Yes
IGPU Model	—	Arc Graphics 64EU
Unlocked	—	Yes
AVX-512	—	Yes
Virtualization	—	VT-x, VT-d

💰

Value Analysis

The Core 3 100HL launched at $306 MSRP, while the Core Ultra 7 265K debuted at $309. On MSRP ($306 vs $309), the Core 3 100HL is $3 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core 3 100HL delivers 57.5 pts/$ vs 190.3 pts/$ for the Core Ultra 7 265K — making the Core Ultra 7 265K the 107.2% better value option.