Intel Core i3-3250T vs Intel Core i3-5020U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a consistent pattern across all five Cinebench comparisons: the Intel Core i3-3250T finishes ahead of the Intel Core i3-5020U in every single test. This is not a narrow margin either. The smallest gap is 20%, and the largest is 20.9%, making the results remarkably uniform.

Starting with the multi-core workloads, the i3-3250T scores 226 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, while the i3-5020U manages 188. That is a 20.2% advantage for the desktop part. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i3-3250T posts 945 versus 787 for the i3-5020U, a 20.1% lead. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the gap is exactly 20%, with the i3-3250T scoring 2252 and the i3-5020U scoring 1876. These multi-core results are strikingly consistent, all hovering around the 20% to 20.2% range.

Single-core performance tells a similar story, though the margins are slightly larger. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-3250T scores 133, while the i3-5020U scores 110. That translates to a 20.9% advantage. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i3-3250T scores 318 versus 264 for the i3-5020U, a 20.5% lead. So whether the workload is fully threaded or single-threaded, the i3-3250T holds a consistent edge.

The overall benchmark average reinforces this. The i3-3250T has an average benchmark score of 775, while the i3-5020U sits at 757. That is a difference of 18 points, which is modest in absolute terms but still places the two chips in different percentile tiers. The i3-3250T ranks in the 21st percentile of all CPUs, while the i3-5020U ranks in the 20th percentile. The i3-5020U does have additional Geekbench results in the database (1379 multi-core and 696 single-core) that the i3-3250T does not have recorded, but those do not factor into the head-to-head comparison.

Looking at nearest rivals for context, the i3-3250T sits alongside the Intel Celeron G5920 with an identical average score of 775, the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 at 776 (0.1% higher), the AMD Athlon X4 760K at 777 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i7-3687U at 773 (0.3% lower). Meanwhile, the i3-5020U is bracketed by the Intel Xeon E5450 at 756 (0.1% higher), the Intel Core i5-3210M at 758 (0.1% lower), the Intel Core i5-4250U at 756 (0.2% higher), and the Intel Core i5-3230M at 754 (0.3% higher). These rival positions show that both chips are in a similar performance neighborhood overall, yet the direct comparison between the two is decisive.

The wins tally is unambiguous: the i3-3250T wins 5 out of 5 head-to-head benchmarks, and the i3-5020U wins 0. No benchmark in the recorded data gives the i3-5020U a victory, not even in a single-threaded test where lower power parts sometimes claw back ground. The i3-3250T simply outruns its younger mobile counterpart in every measured scenario.

The Verdict

The data points to one clear conclusion: the Intel Core i3-3250T is the faster processor in direct comparison. Every benchmark in the database shows it ahead by roughly 20%, and that margin holds across both single-core and multi-core workloads. If the primary criterion is raw computational performance, the i3-3250T is the pick.

However, the i3-5020U is not without its own merits, and the data reveals a different kind of advantage. The i3-5020U has a TDP of 15 watts, while the i3-3250T has a TDP of 35 watts. That is a substantial difference in power draw, and for certain use cases it matters more than raw benchmark scores. The i3-5020U also belongs to a newer architecture generation (Broadwell versus Ivy Bridge) and uses a smaller 14 nm process node compared to the 22 nm node of the i3-3250T. These architectural differences translate into efficiency gains, even if they do not show up as higher Cinebench scores.

The market segments also differ. The i3-3250T is a desktop part, while the i3-5020U is a mobile part. They are not competing for the same physical space or the same thermal envelope. The i3-3250T is designed to sit in a desktop motherboard with more cooling headroom, while the i3-5020U is built for laptops where power and heat are at a premium. The data suggests that if you can accommodate the higher power draw, the i3-3250T delivers more performance. If you need a low-power solution for a portable device, the i3-5020U is the only one of the two that fits that role.

The i3-5020U also has a recorded launch MSRP of $281, which can be stated once as historical context, though the i3-3250T has no such figure in the database. Neither chip is in current production; both are marked as end-of-life.

Where Each One Wins

The i3-3250T wins in every benchmark category recorded in the database. That includes all five Cinebench tests: R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core. For users running CPU-heavy tasks such as video encoding, 3D rendering, or software compilation, the i3-3250T is the stronger choice. Its 20% to 20.9% lead in these tests means that a task taking 10 minutes on the i3-3250T would take roughly 12 minutes on the i3-5020U, assuming the same workload scales linearly.

The i3-5020U does not win any benchmark, but it does win in areas that are not captured by Cinebench scores. Its 15 watt TDP is less than half of the i3-3250T's 35 watt TDP, which makes it suitable for fanless or passively cooled designs and for extending battery life in laptops. The i3-5020U also has a newer integrated graphics solution: Intel HD 5500 versus Intel HD 2500 on the i3-3250T. While no graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database, the generational jump in integrated graphics typically implies better media playback and light gaming performance, though that is not directly measured here.

The i3-5020U also supports PCIe Gen 2 with 12 lanes, while the i3-3250T supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The i3-3250T has the higher bandwidth interface, which matters for discrete GPUs or high-speed NVMe storage, but the i3-5020U's lower lane count is typical for a mobile part where expansion is limited.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-3250T is faster in every recorded multi-core test. It scores 226 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 188 for the i3-5020U, 945 in Cinebench R20 multi-core versus 787, and 2252 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 1876. The advantage ranges from 20% to 20.2%.

Q: Does the i3-5020U win in any benchmark?

A: No. In the head-to-head benchmark data, the i3-3250T wins all 5 tests, and the i3-5020U wins 0. The i3-5020U does have additional Geekbench results recorded (1379 multi-core and 696 single-core), but the i3-3250T has no Geekbench scores in the database, so no direct comparison is available for those tests.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The i3-3250T has a TDP of 35 watts, while the i3-5020U has a TDP of 15 watts. The i3-5020U draws less than half the power, which makes it more suitable for laptops and low-power builds.

Q: Are these CPUs still in production?

A: No. Both the Intel Core i3-3250T and the Intel Core i3-5020U are marked as end-of-life in the database. The i3-3250T was released in June 2013, and the i3-5020U was released in February 2015.

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

A: The i3-3250T has an average score of 775, matching the Intel Celeron G5920 exactly, sitting 0.1% below the Intel Pentium Silver J5005, 0.2% below the AMD Athlon X4 760K, and 0.3% above the Intel Core i7-3687U. The i3-5020U has an average score of 757, sitting 0.1% below the Intel Xeon E5450, 0.1% above the Intel Core i5-3210M, 0.2% above the Intel Core i5-4250U, and 0.3% above the Intel Core i5-3230M.

Q: Which CPU has better integrated graphics?

A: The i3-5020U features Intel HD 5500, while the i3-3250T features Intel HD 2500. No graphics benchmarks are recorded in the database, but the model numbers indicate a newer generation on the i3-5020U.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different architectural eras. The i3-3250T is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture with the codename "Ivy Bridge," while the i3-5020U is built on the Broadwell architecture with the codename "Broadwell-U." The i3-3250T belongs to the Core i3 (Ivy Bridge) generation, and the i3-5020U belongs to the Core i3 (Broadwell-U) generation.

The manufacturing process differs significantly. The i3-3250T uses a 22 nm process node, while the i3-5020U uses a 14 nm process node. Both are fabricated by Intel, but the 14 nm node is denser and more power-efficient. The i3-5020U has a recorded transistor count of 1,300 million, while the i3-3250T does not have a transistor count in the database. The die sizes are close: 94 mm² for the i3-3250T and 82 mm² for the i3-5020U, despite the i3-5020U having a smaller process node and a lower power envelope.

Both CPUs have the same core and thread configuration: 2 cores and 4 threads. The cache hierarchy is also identical in structure: 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither chip supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. Memory support is DDR3 with a dual-channel bus and a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s for both.

The sockets are completely different. The i3-3250T uses Intel Socket 1155, a desktop socket that allows for interchangeable CPUs on compatible motherboards. The i3-5020U uses Intel BGA 1168, a ball-grid array socket that is soldered directly to the motherboard, meaning it is not upgradeable. This is a fundamental difference in how the two chips are deployed. The PCIe support also differs: the i3-3250T offers Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the i3-5020U offers Gen 2 with 12 lanes.

The i3-5020U has a recorded transistor count and a launch MSRP of $281, while the i3-3250T has neither in the database. The i3-3250T has a part number of SR0YW, and the i3-5020U has a part number of SR240.

Specification Differences

The most obvious specification difference is the base clock speed. The i3-3250T runs at 3.00 GHz, while the i3-5020U runs at 2.20 GHz. Neither chip has a boost clock, so these are fixed operating frequencies. The higher clock speed of the i3-3250T is likely a major contributor to its benchmark advantage.

TDP is another clear differentiator. The i3-3250T has a TDP of 35 watts, and the i3-5020U has a TDP of 15 watts. This makes the i3-5020U much more power-efficient, at the cost of raw performance.

The socket types are incompatible with each other. The i3-3250T uses Intel Socket 1155, and the i3-5020U uses Intel BGA 1168. A user cannot swap one for the other without changing the entire motherboard or platform.

The process node differs: 22 nm for the i3-3250T and 14 nm for the i3-5020U. The i3-5020U also has a smaller die size (82 mm² versus 94 mm²) and a recorded transistor count of 1,300 million, which the i3-3250T lacks in the database.

The integrated graphics are different. The i3-3250T uses Intel HD 2500, and the i3-5020U uses Intel HD 5500. The market segments differ as well: the i3-3250T is a desktop part, while the i3-5020U is a mobile part. The release dates are roughly two years apart: the i3-3250T came out in June 2013, and the i3-5020U came out in February 2015.

The PCIe interface differs: Gen 3 with 16 lanes for the i3-3250T, and Gen 2 with 12 lanes for the i3-5020U. The i3-5020U has a launch MSRP of $281, while the i3-3250T has no recorded launch MSRP. Finally, the average benchmark scores differ: 775 for the i3-3250T and 757 for the i3-5020U, with corresponding percentile ranks of 21 and 20.