Intel Core i3-10110U vs Intel Core i5-4430 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a clear split between these two processors, with the older desktop i5-4430 taking five of six head-to-head wins, while the mobile i3-10110U manages a single but significant victory. The most striking result is in Cinebench R15 single-core, where the i3-10110U scores 162 against the i5-4430's 56, a delta of 65.4% in favor of the mobile chip. That is an enormous margin and reflects the much newer architecture and higher boost clock of the i3-10110U.

However, multi-threaded workloads tell a different story. The i5-4430 leads by 22.7% in Cinebench R15 multi-core (400 versus 326), by 22.8% in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1669 versus 1359), and by a similar 22.8% in Cinebench R23 multi-core (3974 versus 3236). The consistency of that roughly 23% advantage across three generations of Cinebench suggests the i5-4430's four physical cores provide a durable edge in heavily threaded rendering tasks, despite the i3-10110U having the same thread count via Hyper-Threading.

Single-core results beyond R15 are less lopsided. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-4430 actually wins with 235 against 191, a 23% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-4430 again wins with 561 against 456, also a 23% lead. This inversion is curious: the i3-10110U wins R15 single-core by a massive margin, yet loses R20 and R23 single-core by an equally consistent 23%. The R15 single-core anomaly appears to be an outlier in the dataset, possibly related to how the older benchmark handles the newer processor's boost behavior. Across the more recent Cinebench versions, the i5-4430 holds a decisive single-threaded advantage as well.

The average benchmark score puts the i5-4430 at 1149 and the i3-10110U at 1131, a gap of less than 2%. Both processors sit near the 32nd to 33rd percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy essentially the same overall performance tier. The i5-4430's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i7-3612QE with an average score of 1147 (0.2% behind), the AMD Opteron 4284 at 1146 (0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-2600S at 1146 (0.3% behind). The i3-10110U's nearest rivals are the Intel Processor N97 at 1132 (0% delta), the Intel Pentium Gold G5500 at 1130 (0.1% ahead of the i3), and the Intel Core i3-4370 at 1130 (0.1% ahead). Both chips are clustered within a narrow band of similarly performing parts, which reinforces the picture of two processors with comparable overall capability but very different strengths in specific workloads.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i5-4430 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It leads by 22.7% in R15 (400 versus 326), 22.8% in R20 (1669 versus 1359), and 22.8% in R23 (3974 versus 3236). The i5-4430's four physical cores give it a consistent edge in multi-threaded workloads.

Q: Does the i3-10110U win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the i3-10110U wins Cinebench R15 single-core with 162 points against the i5-4430's 56 points, a 65.4% advantage. However, the i5-4430 wins both R20 and R23 single-core by 23%, so the R15 result is the only head-to-head win for the mobile chip.

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average score?

A: The i5-4430 has an average benchmark score of 1149, while the i3-10110U averages 1131. That is a margin of about 1.6%, placing both processors within the same performance tier. The i5-4430 sits at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, and the i3-10110U sits at the 32nd percentile.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor?

A: For the i5-4430, the nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-3612QE (1147, 0.2% behind), the AMD Opteron 4284 (1146, 0.2% behind), and the Intel Core i7-2600S (1146, 0.3% behind). For the i3-10110U, they are the Intel Processor N97 (1132, 0% delta), the Intel Pentium Gold G5500 (1130, 0.1% ahead), and the Intel Core i3-4370 (1130, 0.1% ahead).

Q: Which chip has higher core and thread counts?

A: The i5-4430 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The i3-10110U has 2 cores and 4 threads, using Hyper-Threading to match the thread count. The i5-4430's additional physical cores are the main reason for its multi-core advantage.

Q: What are the TDP values for these processors?

A: The i5-4430 has a TDP of 84 watts, while the i3-10110U has a TDP of 25 watts. The i3-10110U is designed for mobile systems and draws substantially less power, which is reflected in its much lower TDP.

The Verdict

The data points to two different use cases. The Intel Core i5-4430 is the better choice for anyone running multi-threaded applications, where it consistently beats the i3-10110U by roughly 23% across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core tests. It also wins the more recent single-core tests in R20 and R23 by the same approximate margin. The i5-4430's average benchmark score of 1149 versus 1131 reinforces its slight overall lead, and its 33rd percentile ranking versus the i3-10110U's 32nd percentile confirms that it sits marginally higher in the database's overall distribution.

The Intel Core i3-10110U is not without merit. Its 65.4% win in Cinebench R15 single-core shows that it can deliver strong single-threaded performance in at least one older workload, and its 25 watt TDP makes it a far more power-efficient option for mobile systems. However, the i3-10110U is marked as end-of-life in the database, and its 2-core design limits its multi-threaded capabilities.

For a desktop user prioritizing rendering and multi-threaded productivity, the i5-4430 is the clear pick based on the recorded benchmark results. For a mobile user who needs lower power consumption and only occasional heavy multi-threaded work, the i3-10110U offers a reasonable compromise, though its overall performance is slightly lower. The i5-4430 wins 5 of the 6 head-to-head benchmarks, which is the simplest summary of where the advantage lies.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every fundamental specification. The i5-4430 uses 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i3-10110U uses 2 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks are 3.00 GHz for the i5-4430 and 2.10 GHz for the i3-10110U, but boost clocks reverse the picture: the i5-4430 boosts to 3.20 GHz, while the i3-10110U boosts to 4.10 GHz. The i5-4430 has a TDP of 84 watts, the i3-10110U a TDP of 25 watts. Socket compatibility is entirely different, with the i5-4430 on Intel Socket 1150 and the i3-10110U on Intel BGA 1440, meaning they cannot be swapped between systems.

Memory support also differs. The i5-4430 supports DDR3 memory in dual-channel configuration, while the i3-10110U supports both DDR3 and DDR4, though the database does not record a memory bus configuration for it. Neither processor supports ECC memory. PCIe support is listed as Gen 3 for the i5-4430, while no PCIe generation is recorded for the i3-10110U. Integrated graphics differ as well: the i5-4430 includes Intel HD 4600, while the i3-10110U includes UHD Graphics. The i5-4430 has a listed part number (SR14G), while the i3-10110U does not have one recorded. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips spans six years of Intel development. The i5-4430 is built on the Haswell architecture, released in 2013, using a 22 nm process node. The i3-10110U is a Comet Lake-U part, released in 2019, built on a 14 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel, but the i5-4430's process node is significantly older. The i5-4430 has a recorded transistor count of 1,400 million and a die size of 177 mm², while the i3-10110U has no transistor count or die size recorded in the database.

Cache configurations are similar in structure but differ in total capacity. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The shared L3 cache differs: the i5-4430 has 6 MB shared, while the i3-10110U has 4 MB shared. Given that the i5-4430 has twice the physical cores, its larger L3 cache makes sense. The i5-4430 belongs to the Core i5 (Haswell) generation and targets the desktop market segment, while the i3-10110U belongs to the Core 10th Gen series, specifically the Core i3 (Comet Lake-U) generation, and targets mobile systems. The i3-10110U is recorded as end-of-life, while the i5-4430 has no production status recorded.

Where Each One Wins

Multi-threaded rendering is the i5-4430's home turf. It wins Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multi-core by 22.7%, 22.8%, and 22.8% respectively. The four physical cores provide a consistent advantage that does not diminish as the benchmark workload evolves. The i5-4430 also wins the more recent single-core tests, taking R20 single-core by 23% and R23 single-core by 23%, which suggests that its architecture handles modern single-threaded workloads better than the older R15 test would indicate.

The i3-10110U's single win comes in Cinebench R15 single-core, where it beats the i5-4430 by 65.4%. This is a substantial margin and indicates that in legacy single-threaded workloads, the newer Comet Lake architecture can deliver a significant performance burst. The i3-10110U's 4.10 GHz boost clock is likely a contributing factor, though the database does not break down clock behavior per benchmark.

For power-sensitive mobile applications, the i3-10110U's 25 watt TDP versus the i5-4430's 84 watt TDP makes it the practical choice for laptops and other portable systems. The i5-4430 is a desktop part with no such power constraint, so it can sustain its higher multi-core performance without worrying about battery life or thermal limits. The i3-10110U supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory, giving system builders more flexibility in memory selection, while the i5-4430 is limited to DDR3.

In terms of overall database standing, the i5-4430 edges out the i3-10110U with an average score of 1149 versus 1131, and its 33rd percentile ranking is one point higher. The practical takeaway: the i5-4430 for desktop multi-threaded work and the i3-10110U for mobile use where its lower power draw and legacy single-core burst performance are more valuable. The 5-to-1 win count in head-to-head benchmarks favors the i5-4430, but the i3-10110U's mobile pedigree and low TDP make it the only realistic option for portable systems.