Intel Core i3-3240 vs Intel Core i5-4250U Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data splits this comparison cleanly by workload type. The Intel Core i3-3240 wins five of the seven head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-4250U takes the remaining two. The i3-3240 leads across every Cinebench test, with margins between 10.3% and 10.6%. The i5-4250U counters with substantial Geekbench wins, leading by 14% in multicore and 12.4% in singlecore.

For users prioritizing sustained multi-threaded rendering or CPU-bound productivity tasks, the i3-3240 is the stronger choice based on Cinebench results. For users whose workloads align more closely with Geekbench's test methodology, the i5-4250U shows a clear advantage. The i3-3240 also carries a much higher thermal design power (55 W versus 15 W), indicating it is designed for desktop systems with active cooling, while the i5-4250U targets mobile platforms where power efficiency matters more. The database places both processors at the 20th percentile among all CPUs, meaning neither is a high-end part, but each serves a different physical and performance niche.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share Intel's 22 nm process node and Ivy Bridge-derived transistor technology, but they diverge in architecture generation and physical design. The i3-3240 is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture and belongs to the Core i3 (Ivy Bridge) generation. It uses a desktop socket (Intel Socket 1155) and has a die size of 94 mm². The i5-4250U is a Haswell part, from the Core i5 (Haswell) generation, and it uses a mobile package (Intel BGA 1168) with a larger die size of 118 mm² and 1,400 million transistors.

Both processors feature 2 cores and 4 threads, with identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. The key architectural differences lie in clock behavior and integrated graphics. The i3-3240 has a fixed base clock of 3.40 GHz with no boost capability, while the i5-4250U has a base clock of 1300.00 MHz (1.30 GHz) but can boost up to 2.60 GHz. The i3-3240 includes Intel HD 2500 graphics, whereas the i5-4250U features Intel HD 5000, a more capable integrated GPU. The desktop part also supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the mobile part has no listed PCIe configuration. Both support DDR3 memory, but only the i3-3240 explicitly lists dual-channel memory bus support; the i5-4250U does not list a memory bus specification in the database.

The production status for both is not recorded, but release dates differ: the i3-3240 launched in September 2012, and the i5-4250U launched in June 2013. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not available for either.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench suite consistently favors the i3-3240. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-3240 scores 201 against the i5-4250U's 182, a 10.4% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the margin is 10.5% (840 versus 760). The single-core Cinebench R20 test shows a 10.3% lead (118 versus 107). Cinebench R23 follows the same pattern: the i3-3240 scores 2000 in multicore versus 1811 for the i5-4250U (10.4% ahead), and 282 versus 255 in singlecore (10.6% ahead). These results indicate that the i3-3240's higher sustained clock speed of 3.40 GHz provides a consistent edge in Cinebench's rendering workloads, which are sensitive to raw clock frequency and stable multi-core operation.

The Geekbench results flip the picture. In Geekbench multicore, the i5-4250U scores 1434 versus 1233 for the i3-3240, a 14% lead. In Geekbench singlecore, the i5-4250U scores 742 versus 650, a 12.4% lead. Geekbench's test suite includes memory and encryption workloads that can benefit from the newer Haswell architecture's improved execution resources and the i5-4250U's boost clock of 2.60 GHz, despite its much lower base clock. The delta percentages are negative from the perspective of the i3-3240, indicating the i5-4250U is the winner in these tests.

The overall benchmark score average in the database is 761 for the i3-3240 and 756 for the i5-4250U, a difference of roughly 0.7%, which reflects the split nature of the results: the i3-3240 dominates Cinebench, while the i5-4250U dominates Geekbench. The nearest rivals for each processor reinforce this picture. The i3-3240's closest competitor is the AMD A8-6600K (average score 764, delta -0.3%), and it is also closely matched with the Intel Core i5-3210M (758, +0.4%) and the Intel Core i3-5020U (757, +0.5%). The i5-4250U's nearest rival is the Intel Xeon E5450 (756, -0.1%), with the Intel Core i3-5020U (757, -0.2%) and the Intel Core i5-3230M (754, +0.2%) also within a fraction of a percent.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several recorded specifications. The i3-3240 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz and no boost clock, while the i5-4250U has a base clock of 1300.00 MHz and a boost clock of 2.60 GHz. Thermal design power is 55 W for the i3-3240 and 15 W for the i5-4250U. The socket types differ: Intel Socket 1155 for the desktop part versus Intel BGA 1168 for the mobile part. The architecture and generation are listed as Ivy Bridge (Core i3) for the i3-3240 and Haswell (Core i5) for the i5-4250U. The die size is 94 mm² for the i3-3240 and 118 mm² for the i5-4250U, with the latter also listing 1,400 million transistors (the i3-3240 has no transistor count recorded). Integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 2500 versus Intel HD 5000. The i3-3240 lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-4250U has no PCIe data. Memory bus support is dual-channel for the i3-3240, with no memory bus field for the i5-4250U. Market segments differ (Desktop versus Mobile), as do release dates (September 2012 versus June 2013) and part numbers (SR0RH versus SR16M). Both processors share the same core/thread count, L1/L2/L3 cache sizes, process node (22 nm), memory support type (DDR3), ECC memory support (false for both), and unlocked multiplier status (false for both).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core i3-3240 wins five of the seven head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core i5-4250U wins two.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap in the head-to-head results?

A: The largest margin is in Geekbench multicore, where the Intel Core i5-4250U leads by 14% (1434 versus 1233). The second-largest is Geekbench singlecore, with the i5-4250U ahead by 12.4% (742 versus 650).

Q: How do the two processors compare in Cinebench R23?

A: The i3-3240 scores 2000 in multicore versus 1811 for the i5-4250U, a 10.4% lead. In singlecore, the i3-3240 scores 282 versus 255, a 10.6% lead.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 2 cores and 4 threads, with the same cache layout: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3.

Q: What is the thermal design power difference?

A: The i3-3240 has a TDP of 55 W, while the i5-4250U has a TDP of 15 W. This reflects the desktop versus mobile design targets.

Q: Which processor has a higher base clock?

A: The i3-3240 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, while the i5-4250U has a base clock of 1300.00 MHz (1.30 GHz). However, the i5-4250U has a boost clock of 2.60 GHz, which the i3-3240 lacks entirely.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-3240 is the clear winner in Cinebench-based workloads. Across all four Cinebench tests (R15 multicore, R20 multicore, R20 singlecore, R23 multicore, and R23 singlecore), it leads by margins between 10.3% and 10.6%. This makes it the better choice for rendering tasks, 3D modeling, or any application that scales with sustained CPU frequency and stable multicore throughput. Its 3.40 GHz base clock, with no boost variability, provides consistent performance under load. The 55 W TDP indicates it expects a desktop power envelope with active cooling, which suits prolonged compute sessions. The i3-3240 also holds a slight overall average benchmark edge at 761 versus 756 for the i5-4250U, and it sits in the same 20th percentile among all CPUs.

The Intel Core i5-4250U wins in Geekbench multicore and singlecore by 14% and 12.4%, respectively. Geekbench exercises a broader set of tasks, including memory operations, encryption, and integer/floating-point workloads that can exploit the Haswell architecture's newer design. Despite its lower base clock of 1.30 GHz, the boost clock of 2.60 GHz allows it to reach higher frequencies when needed, and the 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where thermal headroom is minimal. The i5-4250U also integrates Intel HD 5000 graphics, which is a more capable GPU than the i3-3240's Intel HD 2500, giving it an edge in scenarios where the integrated graphics matter (though no GPU benchmarks are recorded in this database). For users running Geekbench-style workloads or needing a power-efficient mobile processor, the i5-4250U is the better fit.

The split is clean: the i3-3240 for Cinebench-style rendering and desktop use, the i5-4250U for Geekbench-style general-purpose tasks and mobile form factors. The nearest rival data shows both processors are closely matched with other mid-range parts, as the i3-3240's closest competitor (AMD A8-6600K) is within 0.3% of its average score, and the i5-4250U's closest competitor (Intel Xeon E5450) is within 0.1%. Neither processor stands out as a performance leader, but each wins where its design strengths apply.