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

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

Intel Core i3-380M

► remove from comparison Intel 380M

The Intel Core i3-380M is a middle class dual core CPU for laptops and clocks with 2.53 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). It is part of the Arrandale refresh and successor to the 2.4 GHz i3-370M.

A feature of the new Core i3-380M 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 i3-380M should be at a level of a 2.6-2.7 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 i3-350M

► 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 i3-380MIntel Core i3-350M
Intel Core i3Intel Core i3
ArrandaleArrandale
Series: Core i3 Arrandale
Intel Core i3-390M compare2.67 GHz2 / 43 MB
» Intel Core i3-380M2.53 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 i3-380UM 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 i3-380M2.53 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 i3-380UM compare1.33 GHz2 / 43 MB
Intel Core i3-330UM compare1.2 GHz2 / 43 MB
2533 MHz2260 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 500-667MHz,Hyper Threading, Enhanced Speedstep, integrierte GMA HD 667MHz,
Architecturex86x86
Intel Core i3 380MIntel Core i3 350M

Benchmarks

Cinebench R11.5 - Cinebench R11.5 CPU Multi 64 Bit
100%
380M +
min: 2.07     avg: 2.1     median: 2.1 (4%)     max: 2.2 Points
min: 1.49     avg: 1.8     median: 1.9 (3%)     max: 1.89 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (32bit)
100%
380M +
min: 2719     avg: 2788     median: 2808 (25%)     max: 2830
min: 2152     avg: 2445     median: 2453 (22%)     max: 2559
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (32bit)
100%
380M +
min: 6512     avg: 6558     median: 6554 (11%)     max: 6602
min: 5616     avg: 5826     median: 5843 (9%)     max: 5943
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Multi (64bit)
100%
380M +
min: 7602     avg: 7797     median: 7810.5 (7%)     max: 7966 Points
min: 6763     avg: 6999     median: 7000 (7%)     max: 7146 Points
Cinebench R10 - Cinebench R10 Rend. Single (64bit)
100%
380M +
min: 3349     avg: 3434     median: 3457.5 (24%)     max: 3472 Points
min: 2920     avg: 3066     median: 3073.5 (22%)     max: 3183 Points
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 1024m *
100%
380M +
min: 620     avg: 621     median: 621 (7%)     max: 623 s
min: 696     avg: 923     median: 706.5 (8%)     max: 1820 s
wPrime 2.10 - wPrime 2.0 32m *
100%
380M +
min: 19.7     avg: 20.1     median: 20 (4%)     max: 20.5 s
min: 22     avg: 29.2     median: 22.6 (5%)     max: 57 s
3DMark 06 - CPU - 3DMark 06 - CPU
100%
380M +
min: 2671     avg: 2697     median: 2699 (15%)     max: 2731 Points
min: 2315     avg: 2371     median: 2366 (13%)     max: 2461 Points
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 1M *
100%
380M +
min: 14     avg: 16.5     median: 17.3 (4%)     max: 17.5 s
Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 2M *
100%
380M +
min: 41     avg: 42.2     median: 41.8 (2%)     max: 44.3 s
Super Pi Mod 1.5 XS 32M - Super Pi mod 1.5 XS 32M *
100%
380M +
min: 947     avg: 954     median: 951 (4%)     max: 964.2 s
SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS) - SiSoft Sandra Dhrystone (MIPS)
100%
380M +
31000 MIPS (15%)
min: 27700     avg: 30348     median: 30475 (14%)     max: 32510 MIPS
SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS) - SiSoft Sandra Whetstone (MFLOPS)
100%
380M +
min: 26160     avg: 26285     median: 26285 (20%)     max: 26410 MFLOPS
min: 21530     avg: 22088     median: 21575 (17%)     max: 24100 MFLOPS
Windows 7 Experience Index - Win7 CPU
100%
380M +
6.8 Points (87%)
3DMark Vantage - 3DM Vant. Perf. CPU no Physx
100%
380M +
min: 7240     avg: 7262     median: 7246 (8%)     max: 7300 Points
min: 6466     avg: 6552     median: 6515 (8%)     max: 6747 Points
3DMark 11 - 3DM11 Performance Physics
100%
1 380M +
min: 2073     avg: 2338     median: 2391.5 (9%)     max: 2497 Points

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-380M → 100% n=15

Average Benchmarks Intel Core i3-350M → 93% 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 21. 16:20:24

#0 checking url part for id 1264 +0s ... 0s

#1 checking url part for id 536 +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 Mon, 20 Sep 2021 13:09:15 +0200 +0s ... 0s

#4 composed specs +0.007s ... 0.007s

#5 did output specs +0s ... 0.007s

#6 getting avg benchmarks for device 1264 +0s ... 0.008s

#7 got single benchmarks 1264 +0.03s ... 0.038s

#8 getting avg benchmarks for device 536 +0s ... 0.038s

#9 got single benchmarks 536 +0.048s ... 0.086s

#10 got avg benchmarks for devices +0s ... 0.086s

#11 min, max, avg, median took s +0.013s ... 0.099s

#12 return log +0.027s ... 0.125s

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)