Intel Core i3-3240 vs Intel Core i5-750 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent pattern across all Cinebench tests: the Intel Core i5-750 wins every head-to-head matchup against the Intel Core i3-3240. The database lists five benchmark comparisons, and the i5-750 takes all five, with margins that remain remarkably stable across different workload types.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-750 scores 218 against 201 for the i3-3240, a delta of 7.8 percent. That same 7.8 percent gap appears in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the i5-750 posts 128 versus 118. The multi-core R20 test shows a nearly identical 7.9 percent difference, with scores of 912 and 840 respectively. The newest tests in the database, Cinebench R23, confirm the pattern: multi-core results show 2172 for the i5-750 versus 2000 for the i3-3240 (7.9 percent), while single-core shows 306 versus 282 (7.8 percent).

The consistency of these margins is notable. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the i5-750 maintains roughly a 7.8 to 7.9 percent advantage across every recorded test. This suggests the gap is not workload-specific but reflects an overall performance differential between the two processors. The i3-3240 does hold its own in terms of per-core efficiency, given that it achieves these scores with only two physical cores and four threads, but the i5-750's four physical cores and higher boost clock ultimately carry it to victory in every benchmark.

For context, the i3-3240's average benchmark score sits at 761, placing it in the 20th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The i5-750 averages 747, also landing in the 20th percentile. Despite the i5-750 winning every head-to-head test, its average score is actually lower because it lacks Geekbench results in the database, which pulls down its aggregate figure. The i3-3240's nearest rivals include the AMD A8-6600K at 764 (0.3 percent ahead), the Intel Core i5-3210M at 758 (0.4 percent behind), and the Intel Core i3-5020U at 757 (0.5 percent behind). The i5-750's nearest rivals are clustered closer, with the Intel Core i5-4200U at 746 (0.2 percent behind) and the AMD A10 PRO-7800B at 746 (0.2 percent behind).

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins more benchmarks in the head-to-head comparison?

A: The Intel Core i5-750 wins all five recorded head-to-head tests. It takes Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core, giving it a 5-0 record against the i3-3240.

Q: How large is the performance gap between the two in multi-core workloads?

A: The i5-750 leads by 7.8 percent in Cinebench R15 multi-core (218 vs 201), 7.9 percent in R20 multi-core (912 vs 840), and 7.9 percent in R23 multi-core (2172 vs 2000). The gap is nearly identical across all multi-core tests.

Q: Does the i3-3240 have any single-core advantage?

A: No. The i5-750 wins single-core tests as well, posting 128 versus 118 in R20 single-core and 306 versus 282 in R23 single-core. Both represent a 7.8 percent advantage for the i5-750.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The i3-3240 has an average benchmark score of 761, while the i5-750 averages 747. Both processors sit in the 20th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

Q: How do these processors compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The i3-3240 is nearly tied with the AMD A8-6600K, which scores 764 (0.3 percent higher), and sits slightly ahead of the Intel Core i5-3210M at 758 (0.4 percent lower). The i5-750 is similarly clustered with its rivals: the Intel Core i5-4200U and AMD A10 PRO-7800B both score 746, putting them 0.2 percent behind.

Q: Which processor has higher single-core performance in the newest Cinebench test?

A: In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i5-750 scores 306 compared to 282 for the i3-3240, a 7.8 percent advantage. The i5-750's higher boost clock of 3.20 GHz contributes to this edge.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i5-750 is the clear winner for any workload that benefits from additional physical cores. Its four cores and four threads give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded applications like video rendering, 3D modeling, and batch processing. The Cinebench R23 multi-core result of 2172 versus 2000 demonstrates this, and the same pattern holds across every multi-threaded test in the database. For users running productivity suites that can utilize four cores, the i5-750's consistent 7.9 percent lead in multi-core tests makes it the stronger choice.

The i5-750 also takes single-threaded performance. Its boost clock of 3.20 GHz helps it edge out the i3-3240 in lightly threaded tasks such as web browsing, office applications, and older games that rely on one or two cores. The 7.8 percent advantage in Cinebench R23 single-core (306 vs 282) shows that even without multi-threading, the i5-750 maintains its lead.

The i3-3240's wins are more situational. It matches the i5-750's single-threaded performance more closely than its core count might suggest, thanks to a higher base clock of 3.40 GHz versus 2.67 GHz. The i3-3240 also includes integrated graphics with Intel HD 2500, which the i5-750 lacks entirely. For a system without a discrete graphics card, the i3-3240 can provide display output, while the i5-750 would require a separate GPU. The i3-3240's lower TDP of 55 watts versus 95 watts also makes it more suitable for compact or power-conscious builds, though the database does not include thermal performance measurements.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on several fundamental specifications. The i3-3240 uses the Intel Socket 1155, while the i5-750 uses Intel Socket 1156, meaning they are not interchangeable in the same motherboard. The i3-3240 has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i5-750 has 4 cores and 4 threads. Base clocks differ significantly: the i3-3240 runs at 3.40 GHz with no boost clock listed, whereas the i5-750 has a base clock of 2.67 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz.

Thermal design power also separates the two. The i3-3240 is rated at 55 watts, while the i5-750 is rated at 95 watts. The i3-3240 includes integrated graphics (Intel HD 2500), while the i5-750 has no integrated graphics capability listed. PCIe support differs as well: the i3-3240 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i5-750 supports PCIe Gen 2 with 16 lanes (CPU only). Both processors support DDR3 memory with dual-channel memory buses, and neither supports ECC memory. Both have locked multipliers, so neither can be overclocked by adjusting the multiplier.

Release dates place the i3-3240 in September 2012 and the i5-750 in September 2009, a three-year gap that explains some of the architectural differences. The i5-750 is marked as end-of-life production status, while the i3-3240 does not have a production status listed. Part numbers are SR0RH for the i3-3240 and SLBLC for the i5-750.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two processors is substantial. The i3-3240 is built on Ivy Bridge architecture with a 22 nm process node, while the i5-750 uses the older Nehalem architecture on a 45 nm process. This process shrink gives the i3-3240 a significant efficiency advantage, reflected in its 55 watt TDP compared to 95 watts for the i5-750 despite the i5-750 having more physical cores.

Cache configurations differ considerably. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache tells a different story. The i3-3240 has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-750 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. The i5-750's larger cache helps compensate for its older architecture and lower clock speeds in some workloads.

The i5-750's physical footprint reflects its older process: it measures 296 mm² with 774 million transistors, while the i3-3240's die size is 94 mm² with transistor count not listed in the database. The i5-750's codename is Lynnfield, part of the Core i5 (Lynnfield) generation, while the i3-3240 uses the codename Ivy Bridge and belongs to the Core i3 (Ivy Bridge) generation.

The i3-3240's newer architecture brings PCIe Gen 3 support, while the i5-750 is limited to PCIe Gen 2. The i3-3240 also integrates HD 2500 graphics on die, something the i5-750 lacks entirely, reflecting the era in which each was designed. The i5-750 compensates with its boost clock technology, reaching 3.20 GHz under load, whereas the i3-3240 has no boost clock listed and relies on its higher base frequency of 3.40 GHz.

In terms of memory support, both use DDR3 with dual-channel buses, and neither supports ECC memory. The database does not list memory bandwidth figures for either processor. The i3-3240's smaller L3 cache (3 MB) versus the i5-750's 8 MB represents a notable architectural trade-off: the newer process allows for greater efficiency, but the older chip has more cache to feed its four cores. These architectural differences explain why the i5-750 maintains its benchmark lead despite three years of architectural advancement in the i3-3240.