Intel Celeron G5920 vs Intel Core i3-3250T Comparison

The Verdict

The benchmark database shows an unusual outcome for the Intel Celeron G5920 versus the Intel Core i3-3250T: the two processors are statistically indistinguishable in every recorded test. Across five Cinebench workloads, the G5920 and i3-3250T produce identical scores, resulting in a 0% delta in every comparison. The average benchmark score for both is exactly 775, placing each at the 21st percentile of all CPUs tracked in the database.

Given this parity, the choice comes down to platform and longevity rather than performance. The Celeron G5920 is an active production part on Intel Socket 1200 with DDR4 memory support, making it the sensible pick for a new budget desktop build where modern memory and platform availability matter. The Core i3-3250T is end-of-life, uses DDR3 memory, and targets the older Intel Socket 1155 platform, so it appeals primarily to those repairing or upgrading an existing legacy system. Neither part offers a performance advantage over the other, so the decision rests entirely on which socket and memory standard the user already owns or plans to adopt.

Where Each One Wins

The head-to-head benchmark results show zero wins for the i3-3250T and five nominal wins for the Celeron G5920, but every "win" carries a delta of 0%. In practical terms, neither processor wins any workload. The Celeron G5920 is credited with wins in Cinebench R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 single-core, R23 multicore, and R23 single-core, yet all scores are identical to the i3-3250T's results.

The i3-3250T does bring two threads more (4 threads versus 2), which might suggest a multithreading advantage, but the recorded benchmarks do not reflect any such benefit. The Celeron G5920 counters with a higher base clock of 3.50 GHz versus 3.00 GHz and a newer architecture, yet the Cinebench scores remain tied. For users seeking a specific workload winner, the data provides none; for users seeking a platform direction, the G5920's active status and DDR4 support give it the practical edge.

Architecture Differences

The two CPUs come from different eras of Intel's design. The Celeron G5920 is built on the Comet Lake architecture using a 14 nm process node, while the i3-3250T uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm node. The i3-3250T has a measured die size of 94 mm², while the G5920's die size is not recorded in the database.

Core and thread counts differ: the G5920 has 2 cores and 2 threads, while the i3-3250T has 2 cores and 4 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. Base clocks favor the G5920 at 3.50 GHz versus 3.00 GHz, and neither processor offers a boost clock. Cache layouts are similar in the first two levels, with both offering 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, but the shared L3 differs: the G5920 has 2 MB shared, while the i3-3250T has 3 MB shared.

Memory support is a major divider. The G5920 uses DDR4 with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The i3-3250T uses DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and 25.6 GB/s bandwidth. Both support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU, and neither supports ECC memory. Integrated graphics differ as well: the G5920 carries UHD 610, while the i3-3250T carries Intel HD 2500. The G5920 is actively produced and was released in April 2020, whereas the i3-3250T is end-of-life with a release date of June 2013.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: Neither. In Cinebench R15 multicore, both score 226. In R20 multicore, both score 945. In R23 multicore, both score 2252. The delta is 0% in every case.

Q: Do the extra threads on the Core i3-3250T help in any benchmark?

A: No. Despite having 4 threads versus 2, the i3-3250T produces identical scores to the Celeron G5920 across all five Cinebench tests. The recorded data shows no multithreading advantage.

Q: Which processor supports faster memory?

A: The Celeron G5920 supports DDR4 with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The Core i3-3250T supports DDR3 with a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. Both use dual-channel memory buses.

Q: Is the Celeron G5920 still in production?

A: Yes, the database lists the Celeron G5920 as active. The Core i3-3250T is listed as end-of-life.

Q: Do both processors use the same socket?

A: No. The Celeron G5920 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the Core i3-3250T uses Intel Socket 1155.

Q: What is the average benchmark score for each processor?

A: Both have an average benchmark score of 775, and both sit at the 21st percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkable for their uniformity. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the Celeron G5920 and Core i3-3250T both record 226 points, with a delta of 0%. The same pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multicore, where both score 945 points. Single-core performance is equally tied: R20 single-core shows 133 points for both, and R23 single-core shows 318 points for both. The final test, Cinebench R23 multicore, again produces identical results at 2252 points.

These scores place the pair in the same performance class as several nearby rivals in the database. The Intel Pentium Silver J5005 averages 776 points, a delta of -0.1% relative to these parts. The AMD Athlon X4 760K averages 777 points, a delta of -0.2%. The Intel Core i7-3687U averages 773 points, a delta of +0.3%. The G5920 and i3-3250T are therefore bracketed by systems within a four-point range, indicating that any of these five CPUs would deliver comparable Cinebench performance.

The biggest difference between the two contestants is not in raw scores but in platform characteristics. The G5920's DDR4 memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s is substantially higher than the i3-3250T's DDR3 bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, a gap that does not appear in Cinebench results but could matter in memory-sensitive applications. The i3-3250T's larger 3 MB shared L3 cache versus the G5920's 2 MB also fails to produce any benchmark advantage. In every recorded metric, the two processors deliver the same performance, making the platform choice the only meaningful differentiator.