Intel Core i3-10325 vs Intel Core i3-1125G4 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data shows a consistent, one-sided performance story: the Intel Core i3-10325 wins all six recorded head-to-head comparisons against the Intel Core i3-1125G4. The margins are remarkably uniform, hovering around 11% in every Cinebench test. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-10325 scores 881 versus 792, a delta of 11.2%. Single-core in the same test shows a similar gap: 124 versus 111, an 11.7% advantage for the desktop chip. These are not isolated wins; they form a pattern across every rendering workload in the database.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i3-10325 again leads by 11.3% in multicore (3673 versus 3301) and by 11.4% in single-core (518 versus 465). The R23 results repeat the trend: multicore 8747 versus 7860 (11.3% delta), single-core 1234 versus 1109 (11.3% delta). The consistency is striking. No test shows the mobile chip pulling ahead, even by a small margin. The i3-10325's higher boost clock of 4.70 GHz versus 3.70 GHz clearly translates into a meaningful lead in both lightly threaded and fully threaded workloads.

For context, the i3-10325 sits at the 49th percentile of all CPUs in the database, with an average benchmark score of 2530. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon E-2244G (delta 0.1%) and the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 (delta -0.6%). The i3-1125G4, meanwhile, ranks at the 48th percentile with an average score of 2451, placing it close to the Intel Core i5-8600 (delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-10500 (delta 0.2%). So while the absolute gap between the two i3 parts is about 3.2% in average score, the head-to-head Cinebench deltas are roughly 11%. The difference is consistent and not a measurement artifact.

One notable caveat: the i3-1125G4 has an additional Geekbench result in the database (multicore 4509, singlecore 1461), but no corresponding Geekbench score exists for the i3-10325, so it cannot be used for a direct comparison. The Cinebench suite remains the only shared benchmark set, and it favors the desktop part across the board.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-10325. In Cinebench R23 multicore, it scores 8747 versus 7860 for the i3-1125G4, an 11.3% lead. The same pattern holds in R15 (881 versus 792) and R20 (3673 versus 3301).

Q: Does the i3-1125G4 win any benchmark in the database?

A: No. Across all six shared Cinebench tests, the i3-1125G4 loses every single one. The closest margin is 11.2% (R15 multicore), and the widest is 11.7% (R15 single-core). There are no recorded wins for the mobile chip.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The i3-10325 is virtually tied with the Intel Xeon E-2244G (delta 0.1%) and slightly ahead of the Intel Xeon E5-1650 v3 (delta -0.6%). The i3-1125G4 is nearly identical to the Intel Core i5-8600 (delta -0.1%) and the Intel Core i5-10500 (delta 0.2%).

Q: What is the average benchmark score difference between the two?

A: The i3-10325 has an average benchmark score of 2530, while the i3-1125G4 averages 2451. That is a difference of 79 points, roughly 3.2%. However, the Cinebench-specific deltas are much larger, around 11.3% in most tests.

Q: Are there any architectural advantages for the mobile chip?

A: The i3-1125G4 uses a 10 nm process node versus 14 nm for the i3-10325, and it has a larger L1 cache (80 KB per core versus 64 KB) and a much larger L2 cache (1.25 MB per core versus 256 KB). It also supports PCIe Gen 4 and LPDDR4X memory. Despite these newer technologies, its lower clock speeds and 15 W TDP limit its benchmark performance.

Q: Which chip has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The i3-10325 scores 1234 in R23 single-core versus 1109 for the i3-1125G4, an 11.3% advantage. The desktop chip's 4.70 GHz boost clock gives it a clear edge in lightly threaded tasks.

Architecture Differences

The two processors belong to different generations and are built for entirely different market segments. The Intel Core i3-10325 is a desktop part based on Comet Lake (Comet Lake-R), fabricated on Intel's 14 nm process. It runs at a base clock of 3.90 GHz and boosts to 4.70 GHz, with a TDP of 65 W. Its cache layout features 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 8 MB of shared L3. It supports DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode with a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, and it uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 630.

The Intel Core i3-1125G4 is a mobile part from the Tiger Lake-U family, built on Intel's 10 nm process (Willow Cove-U). Its base clock is 2000.00 MHz (2.00 GHz) with a boost of 3.70 GHz, and it has a dramatically lower TDP of 15 W. The cache hierarchy differs notably: 80 KB of L1 per core, 1.25 MB of L2 per core, and the same 8 MB of shared L3. It supports both DDR4 and LPDDR4X memory in dual-channel mode, though the database does not list a memory bandwidth figure for it. PCIe connectivity is Gen 4 with 16 CPU lanes. The integrated graphics are Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4.

The process node difference is significant: 14 nm for Comet Lake versus 10 nm for Tiger Lake. The die size for the i3-1125G4 is listed at 144 mm², while no die size is recorded for the i3-10325. The mobile chip also has a much larger L2 cache per core (1.25 MB versus 256 KB), which could help in some workloads, but the benchmark data shows that clock speed and power budget dominate the outcome. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The socket differences are fundamental: the i3-10325 uses Intel Socket 1200, while the i3-1125G4 is soldered to Intel BGA 1449. This means the desktop chip can be replaced or upgraded in a compatible motherboard, while the mobile chip is intended for laptops and is not user-serviceable. The production status also differs: the i3-10325 is listed as Active, while the i3-1125G4 is End-of-life.

The Verdict

Based strictly on recorded data, the Intel Core i3-10325 is the faster processor in every shared benchmark. It leads by roughly 11% in all six Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 11.2% to 11.7%. The desktop chip also holds a higher percentile rank (49 versus 48) and a higher average benchmark score (2530 versus 2451). If raw compute performance is the only criterion, the choice is clear: the i3-10325 wins outright.

However, the i3-1125G4 is not without merits. Its 10 nm process, larger L2 cache, PCIe Gen 4 support, and LPDDR4X memory compatibility represent newer technology. Its 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops, where the i3-10325's 65 W desktop power envelope would be impossible to accommodate. The mobile chip also has Geekbench scores recorded in the database (multicore 4509, singlecore 1461), although no direct comparison is possible because the i3-10325 lacks those results.

For a desktop builder with access to a Socket 1200 motherboard, the i3-10325 is the better choice for performance. For a laptop buyer or a system requiring low power consumption, the i3-1125G4 is the only practical option between the two, despite its slower benchmark results. The data does not support any scenario where the i3-1125G4 outperforms the i3-10325 in rendering workloads.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-10325 | Intel Core i3-1125G4 |

| --- | --- | --- |

| Series | Core 10th Gen | Not listed |

| Base Clock | 3.90 GHz | 2000.00 MHz (2.00 GHz) |

| Boost Clock | 4.70 GHz | 3.70 GHz |

| TDP | 65 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1200 | Intel BGA 1449 |

| Architecture | Comet Lake | Tiger Lake |

| Codename | Comet Lake-R | Tiger Lake-U |

| Process Node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Die Size | Not listed | 144 mm² |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 80 KB (per core) |

| L2 Cache | 256 KB (per core) | 1.25 MB (per core) |

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR4 | DDR4, LPDDR4X |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | Not listed |

| PCIe | Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only) | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | UHD Graphics 630 | Iris Xe-LP Graphics G4 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | Active | End-of-life |

| Release Date | 2021-03-15 | 2021-03-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $154 | $281 |

| Part Number | SRH3H | SRK8S |

Where Each One Wins

Intel Core i3-10325 wins: all six Cinebench tests, including multicore and single-core variants of R15, R20, and R23. It also wins on average benchmark score (2530 versus 2451) and percentile rank (49 versus 48). It offers a higher base clock (3.90 GHz versus 2.00 GHz) and a higher boost clock (4.70 GHz versus 3.70 GHz). It is the only one of the two with a recorded memory bandwidth figure (42.7 GB/s) and the only one with an Active production status, meaning it remains available for new desktop builds.

Intel Core i3-1125G4 wins: on process node (10 nm versus 14 nm), larger L1 cache (80 KB per core versus 64 KB), much larger L2 cache (1.25 MB per core versus 256 KB), PCIe Gen 4 versus Gen 3, LPDDR4X memory support, a smaller die footprint (144 mm²), and a far lower TDP (15 W versus 65 W), making it viable for fanless or low-power mobile designs. It also has recorded Geekbench scores in the database (multicore 4509, singlecore 1461), which the i3-10325 lacks, though those results cannot be compared directly. It was released later in the database timeline (2021-03-30 versus 2021-03-15) and carries a higher launch MSRP of $281 versus $154.

In practical terms, the i3-10325 is the pick for desktop performance, while the i3-1125G4 is the pick for mobile efficiency and modern platform features. The benchmark data leaves no ambiguity about which one renders faster.