Intel Core i3-3250T vs Intel Pentium Silver J5005 Comparison

The Verdict

The recorded data positions the Intel Pentium Silver J5005 as the outright winner in every benchmark comparison against the Intel Core i3-3250T. Across five Cinebench workloads, the Pentium Silver takes all five wins, with deltas ranging from 17.9% to 18.6%. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical (776 for the J5005, 775 for the i3-3250T), but the distribution of those scores favors the newer chip. The i3-3250T is a 2-core, 4-thread desktop part from the Ivy Bridge generation, while the J5005 is a 4-core, 4-thread mobile part built on Goldmont Plus. The data shows that the J5005 is the better choice for any Cinebench workload, whether single-threaded or multi-threaded. Users who need a low-power chip with superior rendering scores should pick the J5005. The i3-3250T retains a slight edge in platform connectivity (PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes versus Gen 2 with 6 lanes), but that does not translate into any benchmark advantage in the recorded results.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel eras. The Pentium Silver J5005 uses the Goldmont Plus architecture on the Gemini Lake platform, built on a 14 nm process with a 93 mm² die. The Core i3-3250T uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process with a 94 mm² die. The node difference is substantial: 14 nm versus 22 nm, which helps explain the J5005's efficiency advantage.

Core counts differ significantly. The J5005 has 4 physical cores with 4 threads, while the i3-3250T has 2 physical cores with 4 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. Base clocks are also distinct: the J5005 runs at 1500 MHz with a boost clock of 2.80 GHz, while the i3-3250T has no boost clock and sits at a fixed 3.00 GHz. The i3-3250T has a higher base clock, but the J5005's boost capability narrows the gap in single-thread workloads.

Cache hierarchies are organized differently. The J5005 offers 56 KB of L1 per core and 4 MB of shared L2 cache, with no L3. The i3-3250T provides 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. The J5005's larger shared L2 compensates for its lack of L3, which matters in multi-threaded rendering tasks.

Memory support diverges clearly. The J5005 uses DDR4 with dual-channel support and 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The i3-3250T uses DDR3 with dual-channel support and 25.6 GB/s. That bandwidth gap (38.4 versus 25.6) is a major factor in the J5005's multi-core wins. The J5005 also has a smaller platform footprint: PCIe Gen 2 with 6 lanes, versus Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the i3-3250T. Integrated graphics differ too: the J5005 pairs with UHD Graphics 605, while the i3-3250T includes Intel HD 2500.

The J5005 is a mobile segment part on Intel BGA 1090, while the i3-3250T is a desktop part on Intel Socket 1155. Both are end-of-life products. The J5005 launched in December 2017 with a launch MSRP of $161. The i3-3250T launched in June 2013 with no recorded launch MSRP. The J5005 has a TDP of 10 watts, versus 35 watts for the i3-3250T. That 25-watt difference reflects the process node and architecture efficiency gains, though the i3-3250T's higher base clock does not translate into a performance win in the recorded tests.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The J5005 wins every recorded Cinebench test. The smallest margin is in Cinebench R23 single-core, where the J5005 scores 375 versus 318 for the i3-3250T, a 17.9% lead. The largest margin is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the J5005 scores 268 versus 226, an 18.6% advantage. The pattern is consistent across all workloads.

In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the J5005 scores 1117 against 945, a delta of 18.2%. In the single-core version of the same test, the J5005 scores 157 versus 133, an 18% lead. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 2660 versus 2252, an 18.1% gap. The J5005 also holds a narrow average score advantage: 776 versus 775, a 0.2% delta in the nearest rivals list. The i3-3250T's nearest rivals include the Intel Celeron G5920 (equal average score of 775) and the AMD Athlon X4 760K at 777, which is 0.2% ahead of the i3-3250T.

The data indicates that the J5005's architecture, with 4 physical cores and higher memory bandwidth, delivers consistent multi-core advantages. The i3-3250T's higher base clock (3.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz) does not overcome the core deficit and the older memory subsystem. Even in single-core tests, where the i3-3250T's clock advantage should help, the J5005 leads by roughly 18%. That suggests the Goldmont Plus architecture, despite a lower base clock, achieves better instructions per clock in these workloads, aided by the boost clock reaching 2.80 GHz.

The head-to-head table shows no wins for the i3-3250T. The nearest rivals for the i3-3250T include the J5005 at 776 (a 0.1% delta for the i3-3250T, meaning the J5005 is effectively tied in average score). The J5005's nearest rivals include the AMD Athlon X4 760K at 777 (0.1% behind the J5005) and the Intel Pentium G4520 at 778 (0.2% behind). Both chips sit at the 21st percentile among all CPUs, indicating they are in the lower performance tier overall.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more cores?

A: The Intel Pentium Silver J5005 has 4 cores and 4 threads. The Intel Core i3-3250T has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: What is the memory bandwidth difference?

A: The J5005 supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s of memory bandwidth. The i3-3250T supports DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s. That is a 12.8 GB/s advantage for the J5005.

Q: Does the i3-3250T win any benchmark?

A: No. In all five recorded Cinebench tests, the J5005 wins with deltas between 17.9% and 18.6%. The i3-3250T records zero wins.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The J5005 averages 776, and the i3-3250T averages 775. That is a 0.2% difference, effectively a tie in overall average score. The J5005 sits 0.1% ahead of the i3-3250T in the latter's nearest rivals list.

Q: What are the TDP ratings?

A: The J5005 has a TDP of 10 watts. The i3-3250T has a TDP of 35 watts. The J5005 uses significantly less power.

Q: Which platform has more PCIe lanes?

A: The i3-3250T offers PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The J5005 offers PCIe Gen 2 with 6 lanes. The i3-3250T has more lanes and a newer PCIe generation.

Where Each One Wins

The J5005 wins every rendering benchmark in this comparison. For multi-threaded Cinebench workloads, the J5005 leads by 18.1% to 18.6%, depending on the test version. For single-threaded workloads, the lead is 17.9% to 18%. That makes the J5005 the clear choice for users running Cinebench or similar CPU-bound rendering tasks. The 4-core design and higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s) drive these results. The J5005 also offers a much lower TDP (10 watts versus 35 watts), which suits compact or passively cooled systems. Its mobile segment and BGA 1090 socket mean it is intended for embedded or all-in-one designs, not for user upgrades.

The i3-3250T does not win in any recorded benchmark, but it retains structural advantages in certain areas. It uses PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, which is superior to the J5005's PCIe Gen 2 with 6 lanes. That matters for systems with discrete graphics cards or multiple NVMe drives, though no benchmark data covers that scenario. The i3-3250T also has a higher base clock (3.00 GHz versus 1.50 GHz), which can benefit workloads that are sensitive to sustained clock speed rather than burst boost. Its desktop socket (Intel Socket 1155) allows for user replacement, whereas the J5005's BGA 1090 is soldered. The i3-3250T also has a smaller average score gap in the nearest rivals list, tying with the Intel Celeron G5920 at 775 and trailing the AMD Athlon X4 760K by only 0.2%.

For users with a desktop platform already on Socket 1155, the i3-3250T may be a drop-in option with better PCIe connectivity. For users prioritizing rendering performance and power efficiency, the J5005 is the stronger part. The data does not show any scenario where the i3-3250T outperforms the J5005 in compute workloads. The choice hinges on platform needs: the i3-3250T for legacy desktop builds with 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes, the J5005 for low-power, high-throughput rendering. Both sit at the 21st percentile among all CPUs, so neither is a high-end part, but the J5005 is consistently faster in the recorded metrics.