CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i3-4150T and Intel Core i3-4130 are both 22 nm Haswell dual-core desktop processors with Hyper-Threading, sharing the same 1,400 million transistor count and 177 mm² die size. Benchmark results show the i3-4130 winning all five head-to-head comparisons, with a consistent performance advantage of roughly 14-15% across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. The i3-4150T counters with a significantly lower 35 W TDP compared to the i3-4130’s 54 W, making the primary trade-off between raw throughput and thermal efficiency.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-4130 has a base clock of 3.40 GHz, while the Intel Core i3-4150T operates at 2.90 GHz. Neither processor features a boost clock.

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

A: The i3-4130 leads in all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the i3-4130 scores 2,833 versus the i3-4150T’s 2,425, a delta of -14.4% for the i3-4150T. The same -14.4% delta appears in Cinebench R20 multicore (1,189 vs 1,018) and Cinebench R15 multicore (285 vs 244).

Q: Is there any benchmark where the i3-4150T wins?

A: No. According to the head-to-head benchmark data, the i3-4130 wins all five recorded tests, covering Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 in both single-core and multi-core configurations. The i3-4150T records zero wins.

Q: What are the cache specifications for each processor?

A: Both CPUs feature identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3 cache. There are no differences in cache capacity between the two models.

Q: Do these CPUs have the same integrated graphics?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i3-4150T and Intel Core i3-4130 integrate Intel HD 4400 graphics. They also share the same Intel Socket 1150, DDR3 dual-channel memory support, and PCIe Gen 3 interface.

Q: What is the release date difference between the two chips?

A: The Intel Core i3-4130 was released on 2013-08-31, while the Intel Core i3-4150T was released on 2014-04-30. The i3-4150T launched approximately eight months later, though neither processor has a listed launch MSRP in the data.

Architecture Differences

Both processors belong to the same Haswell architecture generation and are built on Intel’s 22 nm process node at Intel’s foundry. The transistor count is identical at 1,400 million, and the die size is the same at 177 mm². The core configuration is also identical: 2 physical cores with 4 threads via Hyper-Threading.

The architectural differences are limited to operating parameters rather than silicon changes. The most significant difference is the TDP envelope: the i3-4150T is rated at 35 W, while the i3-4130 is rated at 54 W. This 19 W difference is the defining characteristic that separates the two SKUs, allowing the i3-4150T to fit into lower-power or thermally constrained systems at the cost of clock speed.

The base clock differs accordingly: the i3-4150T runs at 2.90 GHz, while the i3-4130 runs at 3.40 GHz. This 0.50 GHz delta explains the performance gap observed in benchmarks. Neither chip supports a boost clock, so these base frequencies represent the maximum sustained operating speeds under normal conditions.

Cache architecture is fully shared between the two parts, with 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core and 3 MB of shared L3. Memory support is also identical: DDR3, dual-channel, with no ECC capability. Both use Intel Socket 1150 and PCIe Gen 3. The integrated GPU is the same Intel HD 4400 in both cases.

The production status differs: the i3-4130 is listed as "Active," while the i3-4150T has no production status listed in the data. The i3-4130 also has a part number (SR1NP) recorded, whereas the i3-4150T does not.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a uniform picture: the Intel Core i3-4130 outperforms the Intel Core i3-4150T across every measured workload. The most consistent margin is in multi-core tests, where the delta is exactly -14.4% for the i3-4150T in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-4130 scores 285 against 244 for the i3-4150T. In R20 multicore, the scores are 1,189 and 1,018, and in R23 multicore, 2,833 versus 2,425.

Single-core performance tells a similar story with a slightly larger gap. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4130 scores 168 versus 143 for the i3-4150T, a delta of -14.9%. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the margin is -14.5%, with scores of 400 and 342 respectively. The i3-4130 wins all five head-to-head matchups, resulting in a 5-0 win tally.

The consistency of the deltas, all falling between -14.4% and -14.9%, indicates that the performance difference is predominantly clock-speed driven rather than workload-dependent. The i3-4150T’s 2.90 GHz versus the i3-4130’s 3.40 GHz translates to a proportional deficit across both integer and floating-point workloads as measured by the Cinebench suite.

Geekbench data is available only for the i3-4150T, with a multicore score of 1,762 and single-core score of 892. No Geekbench scores are recorded for the i3-4130 in the fact pack, so a direct comparison using that suite is not possible. The i3-4150T’s average benchmark score is 975, which matches the i3-4130’s average benchmark score of exactly 975, despite the i3-4130’s superior results in the head-to-head tests, a quirk of the averaging methodology that includes different test sets.

Both processors sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy the same performance tier in the broader market. The nearest rivals for both chips are identical: the AMD Athlon X4 840, AMD A10-7870K, and Intel Core i5-5257U all share the same 975 average score, with the i5-5257U slightly ahead at 976 (-0.1% delta).

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in only a handful of specification fields, all stemming from the TDP and clock relationship.

Base Clock: The i3-4130 runs at 3.40 GHz, while the i3-4150T runs at 2.90 GHz. This is the operative difference driving all benchmark deltas.

TDP: The i3-4150T is rated at 35 W, versus 54 W for the i3-4130. This 19 W reduction is the primary reason for the lower clock speed.

Release Date: The i3-4130 was released on 2013-08-31, and the i3-4150T followed on 2014-04-30.

Production Status: The i3-4130 is listed as "Active," while the i3-4150T has no production status field populated.

Part Number: The i3-4130 has part number SR1NP recorded; the i3-4150T has no part number in the data.

Benchmark Coverage: The i3-4150T has Geekbench multicore (1,762) and single-core (892) scores, which are absent for the i3-4130. Conversely, the i3-4130 has no Geekbench results but shares the same Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 tests.

All other specifications are identical, including cores (2), threads (4), architecture (Haswell), process node (22 nm), foundry (Intel), transistor count (1,400 million), die size (177 mm²), cache sizes (64 KB L1, 256 KB L2, 3 MB L3), memory support (DDR3 dual-channel), ECC support (false), PCIe generation (Gen 3), integrated graphics (Intel HD 4400), market segment (Desktop), socket (Intel Socket 1150), and unlocked multiplier (false for both).

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-4130 wins decisively in raw performance. It is ahead by 14.4% in all three Cinebench multicore tests and by approximately 14.5-14.9% in single-core tests. This makes it the clear choice for workloads where processing throughput is the priority, rendering, compilation, or any CPU-bound task that can utilize the higher 3.40 GHz clock speed. The i3-4130’s 5-0 head-to-head record reflects its consistent superiority across the entire Cinebench suite, with no workload category where the i3-4150T manages to close the gap.

The Intel Core i3-4150T wins in the thermal and power domain, though this is not reflected in benchmark scores. Its 35 W TDP versus 54 W for the i3-4130 represents a 35% reduction in thermal design power. This makes the i3-4150T suitable for systems where cooling capacity is limited, such as compact desktop builds, fanless designs, or environments with strict acoustic requirements. The lower TDP also implies reduced heat output, which can be a critical factor in dense or passively cooled enclosures.

For general desktop use, the i3-4130 is the more capable processor, delivering roughly 15% more performance in both single-threaded and multi-threaded applications. The i3-4150T’s advantage is entirely situational: it trades a measurable performance deficit for a substantial power efficiency gain. Users who prioritize performance should select the i3-4130; users who prioritize power efficiency or thermal constraints should select the i3-4150T. Both processors occupy the same 26th percentile in the overall CPU landscape, meaning neither represents a meaningful step up in absolute performance class, the choice is strictly between speed and efficiency.

The absence of a boost clock on either part means the i3-4150T cannot dynamically close the clock gap under light loads, cementing its role as a fixed low-power offering. Similarly, the i3-4130 has no headroom above its 3.40 GHz base frequency, so its performance advantage is fixed as well. The data supports a clear verdict: performance buyers choose the i3-4130, efficiency buyers choose the i3-4150T, and there is no overlap between these use cases based on the available benchmarks.