, , , , , ,
search relation.
, , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
 

Intel Core i3-350M vs Intel Core i3-370M

Intel Core i3-350M

► remove from comparison Intel 350M

The Intel Core i3-350M is a lower-middle class dual core CPU for laptops and clocks with 2.26 GHz. The difference to the Core i5-430M is the lacking Turbo Boost overclocking, and the missing AES, VT-d and Trusted Execution functions. Each core is based on the Nehalem (Westmere) micro-architecture. Hyperthreading enables the Dual Core CPU to handle 4 threads at once (for a better usage of the pipeline). 

A feature of the new Core i3-350M is the integrated graphics card called GMA HD and the memory controller. Both are on a separate die that is still manufactured in 45nm whereas the CPU die is already manufactured in the new 32nm process. 

First performance results from [pconline.com.cn] indicate a very good performance per MHz. The site reviewed the upcoming Core i3 530 (2.93 GHz - no turbo) which was on average faster than a Core 2 Duo E8400 (3.0 GHz). Therefore, the mobile Core i3-350M should be faster than a Core 2 Duo P8400.

The integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD (GMA HD) graphics card is known to be clocked up to 500-667 MHz (due to Turbo Boost) and should be clearly faster than the old GMA 4500MHD. The Core i5 and i7 models should still be a bit faster because of the higher max. clock speed of the GPU. The performance of the graphics in 3D should be on par with a Radeon HD 4200 but the driver support is usually worse.

The power consumption of 35 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 35 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo T-series (CPU alone).

Intel Core i3-370M

► remove from comparison Intel 370M

The Intel Core i3-370M is a middle class dual core CPU for laptops and clocks with 2.4 GHz. The difference to the Core i5 and i7 series is the lacking TurboBoost overclocking, and the missing AES, VT-d and Trusted Execution functions. Each core is based on the Nehalem (Westmere) micro-architecture. Hyperthreading enables the Dual Core CPU to handle 4 threads at once (for a better usage of the pipeline). 

A feature of the new Core i3-370M is the integrated graphics card called GMA HD and the memory controller. Both are on a separate die that is still manufactured in 45nm whereas the CPU die is already manufactured in the new 32nm process.

The performance of the Core i3-370M should be between a 2.5 and 2.6 GHz Core 2 Duo (upper class CPUs in the last year). This is mainly due to the efficient HyperThreading function and the integrated memory controller. In single threaded applications it should be at least as fast, as a similar clocked Core 2 Duo.

The integrated Intel Graphics Media Accelerator HD (GMA HD) graphics card is known to be clocked up to 500-667 MHz (due to Turbo Boost) and should be clearly faster than the old GMA 4500MHD. The Core i5 and i7 models should still be a bit faster because of the higher max. clock speed of the GPU. The performance of the graphics in 3D should be on par with a Radeon HD 4200 but the driver support is usually worse.

The power consumption of 35 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 35 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo T-series (CPU alone).

Intel Core i3-350MIntel Core i3-370M
Intel Core i3Intel Core i3
ArrandaleArrandale
Series: Core i3 Arrandale
Intel Core i3-390M compare2.67 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-380M compare2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-370M2.4 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i3-350M2.26 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330M compare2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-380UM compare1.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330UM compare1.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-390M compare2.67 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-380M compare2.53 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i3-370M2.4 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-350M2.26 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330M compare2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-380UM compare1.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330UM compare1.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
2260 MHz2400 MHz
25002500
512 KB512 KB
3 MB3 MB
2 / 42 / 4
35 35
382+177 382+177
32 32
81+114 mm281+114 mm2
105 °C105 °C
BGA1288, PGA988BGA1288, PGA988
Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 667MHz,Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 667MHz,
Architecturex86x86
Intel Core i3 350MIntel Core i3 370M

Benchmarks

Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
350M +
min: 1.49     avg: 1.8     median: 1.9 (3%)     max: 1.89 Points
106%
370M +
min: 1.58     avg: 1.9     median: 2 (4%)     max: 1.99 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
350M +
min: 2152     avg: 2445     median: 2453 (22%)     max: 2559
110%
370M +
min: 2623     avg: 2680     median: 2690 (24%)     max: 2711
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
350M +
min: 5616     avg: 5826     median: 5843 (9%)     max: 5943
106%
370M +
min: 6090     avg: 6216     median: 6203.5 (10%)     max: 6506
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
350M +
min: 6763     avg: 6999     median: 7000 (7%)     max: 7146 Points
107%
370M +
min: 7276     avg: 7479     median: 7505 (7%)     max: 7603 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
350M +
min: 2920     avg: 3066     median: 3073.5 (22%)     max: 3183 Points
108%
370M +
min: 3174     avg: 3301     median: 3322 (23%)     max: 3373 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
350M +
min: 696     avg: 923     median: 706.5 (8%)     max: 1820 s
101%
370M +
min: 639.4     avg: 675     median: 659.5 (8%)     max: 737 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
350M +
min: 22     avg: 29.2     median: 22.6 (5%)     max: 57 s
100%
370M +
min: 20.3     avg: 21.7     median: 21.2 (4%)     max: 24 s
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
350M +
min: 2315     avg: 2371     median: 2366 (13%)     max: 2461 Points
109%
370M +
min: 2525     avg: 2574     median: 2578 (14%)     max: 2614 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
350M +
min: 19     avg: 19.4     median: 19 (4%)     max: 20 s
100%
370M +
min: 17.6     avg: 18.1     median: 18 (4%)     max: 19 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
350M +
min: 44     avg: 45.9     median: 45.4 (2%)     max: 50 s
100%
370M +
min: 41.2     avg: 42.4     median: 42 (2%)     max: 46 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
350M +
min: 1033     avg: 1057     median: 1049 (5%)     max: 1121 s
100%
370M +
min: 978.465     avg: 989     median: 990 (4%)     max: 999 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
350M +
min: 27700     avg: 30348     median: 30475 (14%)     max: 32510 MIPS
106%
370M +
min: 30380     avg: 32380     median: 32380 (15%)     max: 34380 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
350M +
min: 21530     avg: 22088     median: 21575 (17%)     max: 24100 MFLOPS
117%
370M +
min: 25000     avg: 25350     median: 25350 (19%)     max: 25700 MFLOPS
min: 4991     avg: 5190     median: 5083 (32%)     max: 5496 Points
105%
370M +
min: 6.6     avg: 6.7     median: 6.7 (86%)     max: 6.7 Points
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
350M +
min: 6466     avg: 6552     median: 6515 (8%)     max: 6747 Points
106%
370M +
min: 6676     avg: 6882     median: 6885 (8%)     max: 6994 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-350M → 100% n=16

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-370M → 105% n=16

- Range of benchmark values for this graphics card
- Average benchmark values for this graphics card
* Smaller numbers mean a higher performance
1 This benchmark is not used for the average calculation

Add one or more devices and compare

In the following list you can select (and also search for) devices that should be added to the comparison. You can select more than one device.

restrict list:

show all (including archived), 2021, 2020
v1.16
log 25. 22:44:19

#0 checking url part for id 536 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 1065 +0s ... 0s

#2 not redirecting to Ajax server +0s ... 0s

#3 did not recreate cache, as it is less than 5 days old! Created at Sat, 25 Sep 2021 13:09:19 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.006s ... 0.006s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.006s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 536 +0s ... 0.007s

#7 got single benchmarks 536 +0.047s ... 0.053s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 1065 +0s ... 0.054s

#9 got single benchmarks 1065 +0.04s ... 0.094s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.094s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.015s ... 0.109s

#12 return log +0.024s ... 0.133s

Please share our article, every link counts!
> Notebook / Laptop Reviews and News > Benchmarks / Tech > Processor Comparison - Head 2 Head
Redaktion, 2017-09- 8 (Update: 2017-09-11)