Intel Core i3-1110G4 vs Intel Core i7-950 Comparison

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 records an average benchmark score of 957, while the Intel Core i3-1110G4 records 945. The i7-950 sits at the 26th percentile of all CPUs, and the i3-1110G4 sits at the 25th percentile.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins all recorded multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 322 versus 280 for the i7-950, a 13% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, it scores 1344 versus 1167, a 13.2% advantage. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3202 versus 2780, also a 13.2% advantage.

Q: Which processor has the higher single-core benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 has the higher single-core score in every recorded test. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 189 versus 164 for the i7-950, a 13.2% difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 452 versus 392, a 13.3% difference.

Q: What is the core and thread configuration of each CPU?

A: The Intel Core i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-1110G4 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Despite having half the cores and threads, the i3-1110G4 wins all head-to-head benchmark comparisons.

Q: Which processor is more energy-efficient?

A: The Intel Core i3-1110G4 has a TDP of 15 watts, compared to the Intel Core i7-950 which has a TDP of 130 watts. The i3-1110G4 delivers higher benchmark scores while drawing substantially less power.

Q: How does the nearest rival comparison look for each processor?

A: The Intel Core i7-950's closest rival is the AMD Opteron 4386 with an identical average score of 957 (0% delta). The Intel Core i3-1110G4's closest rival is the AMD A8-7670K at 944 (0.1% delta), while the AMD Phenom II X6 1045T, Intel Xeon X5560, and Intel Pentium Gold G5400T all score 946 (0.1% lower).

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i7-950 and Intel Core i3-1110G4 represent two very different generations of Intel processor design. The i7-950 is built on the Nehalem architecture with the codename Bloomfield, manufactured on a 45 nm process node. The i3-1110G4 uses the Tiger Lake architecture with the codename Tiger Lake-U, manufactured on a 10 nm process node. This process shrink is a major factor in the performance and efficiency differences observed.

Cache hierarchies reveal another architectural split. The i7-950 features 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-1110G4 has 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 1.25 MB of L2 cache per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-1110G4 has larger per-core L1 and L2 caches, while the i7-950 has a larger total L3 cache.

Memory support differs considerably. The i7-950 uses DDR3 memory with a triple-channel memory bus, while the i3-1110G4 uses DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus. The i3-1110G4 lists a memory bandwidth of 59.7 GB/s, a figure not recorded for the i7-950. Neither processor supports ECC memory.

PCI Express generation also separates them. The i7-950 uses PCIe Gen 2, while the i3-1110G4 uses PCIe Gen 4 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i3-1110G4 also includes integrated graphics, specifically Iris Xe Graphics G4, whereas the i7-950 has no integrated graphics listed.

The i7-950 has a transistor count of 731 million and a die size of 263 mm²; these figures are not recorded for the i3-1110G4. The i7-950 uses the Intel Socket 1366, while the i3-1110G4 uses Intel BGA 1598. The i7-950 is marked as end-of-life, while the i3-1110G4 is listed as active in production.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head data shows a clean sweep for the Intel Core i3-1110G4 across all five benchmark comparisons. The i7-950 does not win a single test.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-1110G4 scores 322 against 280 for the i7-950, a 13% lead. This is notable because the i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads, while the i3-1110G4 has only 2 cores and 4 threads. The newer architecture's efficiency overcomes the core count deficit.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the margin widens slightly in percentage terms. The i3-1110G4 scores 1344, while the i7-950 scores 1167, a 13.2% difference. The same 13.2% delta appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i3-1110G4 scores 189 versus 164.

Cinebench R23 multi-core continues the pattern: the i3-1110G4 scores 3202, and the i7-950 scores 2780, a 13.2% advantage. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the largest relative gap at 13.3%, with the i3-1110G4 scoring 452 and the i7-950 scoring 392.

The consistency of the deltas, all falling between 13% and 13.3%, suggests a uniform performance advantage across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. This is unusual because the i7-950 has double the core count, yet the i3-1110G4's higher clock speeds and newer microarchitecture dominate.

The i7-950's base clock is 3.07 GHz with a boost clock of 3.33 GHz, while the i3-1110G4 has a base clock of 1800.00 MHz (1.8 GHz) and a boost clock of 3.90 GHz. The i3-1110G4's boost clock is substantially higher, which helps explain its single-core superiority.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i7-950 | Intel Core i3-1110G4 |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 8 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.07 GHz | 1800.00 MHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.33 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 130 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1366 | Intel BGA 1598 |

| Architecture | Nehalem | Tiger Lake |

| Codename | Bloomfield | Tiger Lake-U |

| Process Node | 45 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 731 million | Not recorded |

| Die Size | 263 mm² | Not recorded |

| L1 Cache | 64 KB (per core) | 96 KB (per core) |

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

| L3 Cache | 8 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bus | Triple-channel | Dual-channel |

| Memory Bandwidth | Not recorded | 59.7 GB/s |

| PCIe | Gen 2 | Gen 4, 16 Lanes (CPU only) |

| Integrated Graphics | None | Iris Xe Graphics G4 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

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

| Release Date | 2009-06-01 | 2020-09-01 |

| Multiplier Unlocked | No | No |

The release dates are over a decade apart, explaining the generational leap in process technology and feature set. The i7-950 is a desktop part, while the i3-1110G4 targets mobile platforms. The TDP difference is stark: 130 watts versus 15 watts, a factor of nearly nine.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-1110G4 wins every recorded benchmark comparison, making it the clear choice for raw performance in these test workloads. It leads by 13% to 13.3% across both single-core and multi-core Cinebench tests. Its advantage is consistent, not workload-specific.

The i3-1110G4 also wins decisively on efficiency. With a 15-watt TDP versus 130 watts, it delivers higher scores while consuming a fraction of the power. For mobile or compact systems, this is a critical advantage.

The i7-950's only comparative strengths lie in its core and thread count (4 cores, 8 threads versus 2 cores, 4 threads) and its larger shared L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB). However, these structural advantages do not translate into benchmark wins in the recorded data.

The i7-950 also offers triple-channel DDR3 memory support, which could theoretically benefit memory-intensive workloads. However, no benchmark data in the database captures such a scenario, and the i3-1110G4's 59.7 GB/s memory bandwidth suggests strong memory performance despite the dual-channel configuration.

The i3-1110G4 has the advantage of integrated graphics, making it suitable for systems without a discrete GPU. It also supports PCIe Gen 4, which is newer and faster than the i7-950's PCIe Gen 2.

For users prioritizing benchmark scores, energy efficiency, or modern features, the i3-1110G4 is the winner. The i7-950's higher core count and older platform do not yield any measured performance benefit.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-1110G4 outperforms the Intel Core i7-950 in every recorded head-to-head benchmark. The i3-1110G4 wins all five comparisons, with margins ranging from 13% to 13.3%. Its average benchmark score of 945 is slightly lower than the i7-950's 957, but the head-to-head results carry more weight for direct comparison.

The i3-1110G4 achieves this with half the cores and half the threads, relying on a much newer architecture (Tiger Lake versus Nehalem), a smaller process node (10 nm versus 45 nm), and a significantly higher boost clock (3.90 GHz versus 3.33 GHz). Its 15-watt TDP makes it dramatically more efficient than the 130-watt i7-950.

The i7-950's advantages are limited to its 4-core, 8-thread configuration and its 8 MB L3 cache. Neither of these translates into a benchmark win. Its triple-channel DDR3 memory bus is a legacy feature that does not appear to compensate for the architectural gap.

The nearest rival data reinforces that both processors sit in similar overall performance percentiles (26th for the i7-950, 25th for the i3-1110G4), with average scores within 12 points of each other. Yet when measured directly against each other, the i3-1110G4 consistently pulls ahead by a double-digit margin.

For anyone choosing between these two based on the recorded data, the Intel Core i3-1110G4 is the superior option for benchmark performance, efficiency, and modern platform features. The Intel Core i7-950 remains a historical desktop part, its capabilities superseded by a mobile chip with less than a third of its thermal envelope.