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

Intel Core i3-350M vs Intel Core i3-380UM

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 i3-380UM

► remove from comparison

The Intel Core i3-380UM is a Ultra Low Voltage dual-core processor for small and light laptops. It is clocked with 1.3 GHz and does not feature Turbo Boost to overclock the CPU cores. Another feature missing compared to the i5 and i7 lineup is the AES function block. 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). 

The similar Core i5-470UM, i5-560UM, and i7-660UM are also clocked at a base speed of 1.3 GHz, but feature Turbo Boost and are therefore faster.

A feature of the new Core i3-380UM is the integrated graphics card (called Intel HD Graphics) and 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 also called GMA HD is able to use Turbo Boost to overclock from 133 to 500 MHz.

Due to the integrated memory controller and HyperThreading, the  Core i3-380UM is faster than a similar clocked Core 2 Duo (1.3 GHz) in all (us known) applications and benchmarks. Therefore it beats the 1.3 GHz Pentium SU7300 and performs in some areas even as fast as a 2 GHz Core 2 Duo. Still the gaming performance can suffer from the low clock speed.

The power consumption of 18 Watt TDP (max.) counts for the whole package and therefore it is clearly better than the 17 Watt TDP of the Core 2 Duo SL-series (CPU alone).

Intel Core i3-350MIntel Core i3-380UM
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 i3-370M compare2.4 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i3-350M2.26 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330M compare2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-380UM1.33 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 i3-370M compare2.4 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-350M2.26 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330M compare2.13 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i3-380UM1.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330UM compare1.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
2260 MHz1333 MHz
25002500
512 KB512 KB
3 MB3 MB
2 / 42 / 4
35 18
382+177 382+177
32 32
81+114 mm281+114 mm2
105 °C
BGA1288, PGA988BGA1288
Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 667MHz,Intel HD Graphics 166-500MHz, DDR3-800 Memory Controller (max 8GB), Hyper-Threading, Virtualization Technology VT-x, Intel 64, Idle States, Enhanced Speedstep, Thermal Monitoring, Fast Memory Access, Flex Memory Access, Execute Disable Bit
Architecturex86x86
Intel Core i3 350MIntel Core i3 380UM

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
min: 0.99     avg: 1.1     median: 1.1 (2%)     max: 1.11 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
350M +
min: 2152     avg: 2445     median: 2453 (22%)     max: 2559
min: 1268     avg: 1451     median: 1502 (13%)     max: 1530
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
350M +
min: 5616     avg: 5826     median: 5843 (9%)     max: 5943
min: 3052     avg: 3385     median: 3471 (6%)     max: 3546
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
350M +
min: 6763     avg: 6999     median: 7000 (7%)     max: 7146 Points
min: 3729     avg: 4054     median: 4166 (4%)     max: 4266 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
350M +
min: 2920     avg: 3066     median: 3073.5 (22%)     max: 3183 Points
min: 1499     avg: 1733     median: 1845 (13%)     max: 1856 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
350M +
min: 696     avg: 923     median: 706.5 (8%)     max: 1820 s
min: 1178.4     avg: 1686     median: 1264.3 (15%)     max: 3038.54 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
350M +
min: 22     avg: 29.2     median: 22.6 (5%)     max: 57 s
min: 38.2     avg: 53.6     median: 40.5 (8%)     max: 94.989 s
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
350M +
min: 2315     avg: 2371     median: 2366 (13%)     max: 2461 Points
min: 1314     avg: 1426     median: 1463 (8%)     max: 1464 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
min: 31.917     avg: 32     median: 32 (7%)     max: 32 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
min: 72     avg: 72.8     median: 72.9 (3%)     max: 73.6 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
min: 1676.49     avg: 1719     median: 1695 (8%)     max: 1786 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
350M +
min: 27700     avg: 30348     median: 30475 (14%)     max: 32510 MIPS
min: 16560     avg: 18035     median: 18035 (9%)     max: 19510 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
350M +
min: 21530     avg: 22088     median: 21575 (17%)     max: 24100 MFLOPS
min: 13800     avg: 14325     median: 14325 (11%)     max: 14850 MFLOPS
min: 4.5     avg: 4.7     median: 4.8 (62%)     max: 4.8 Points
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
350M +
min: 6466     avg: 6552     median: 6515 (8%)     max: 6747 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-350M → 100% n=15

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-380UM → 74% n=15

- 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 28. 09:52:26

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

#1 checking url part for id 1232 +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 +0.009s ... 0.009s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.009s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 536 +0s ... 0.009s

#7 got single benchmarks 536 +0.048s ... 0.057s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 1232 +0s ... 0.057s

#9 got single benchmarks 1232 +0.01s ... 0.067s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.068s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.012s ... 0.079s

#12 return log +0.004s ... 0.083s

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)