Intel Core i3-4150 vs Intel Core i3-N300 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded data shows a clear split between the two processors depending on the workload generation. The Intel Core i3-N300 wins four of the five head-to-head benchmark comparisons, while the Intel Core i3-4150 claims a single, decisive victory in one multi-core test.

The largest margin belongs to the Intel Core i3-N300 in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where it scores 2849 against the Intel Core i3-4150's 1212, a 135.1% advantage. The single-core result in the same test is nearly identical in proportional terms: the i3-N300 posts 401 versus 170, a 135.9% lead. These two results indicate that the i3-N300's architecture delivers substantially higher throughput per clock in both lightly threaded and fully loaded scenarios within that benchmark generation.

Cinebench R15 multi-core also favors the i3-N300, with a score of 416 against 290 for the i3-4150, a 43.4% difference. This is a smaller margin than the R20 multi-core gap, which suggests that the older test does not fully expose the performance difference between the two designs. The i3-N300 also wins Cinebench R23 single-core, scoring 513 versus 407, a 26% advantage. That result confirms that the i3-N300's single-thread performance advantage persists across benchmark versions, even as the absolute gap narrows compared to the R20 single-core result.

The only benchmark where the Intel Core i3-4150 comes out ahead is Cinebench R23 multi-core. There, the i3-4150 scores 2888 while the i3-N300 scores 2546, giving the older processor an 11.8% lead. This is a notable reversal because the i3-N300 wins both the R15 and R20 multi-core tests. The R23 multi-core result suggests that sustained all-core workloads may behave differently under the newer test's longer rendering workload, possibly due to thermal or power characteristics of the i3-N300's mobile-oriented design. The i3-4150's dual-core, four-thread configuration with a 54 W TDP appears to hold up better in that specific scenario.

Looking at the aggregate data, the Intel Core i3-N300 has an average benchmark score of 1135, while the Intel Core i3-4150 averages 1119. Both processors sit at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs in the database. The i3-N300's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-3570T at 1136 (a 0.1% difference), the Intel Core i5-2550K at 1136 (also 0.1%), the Intel Xeon E5640 at 1137 (0.1%), and the AMD Athlon Silver PRO 3125GE at 1138 (0.3%). The i3-4150's nearest rivals are the Intel Core i7-2860QM at 1120 (0.1% behind), the Intel Core i5-3550S at 1118 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Athlon 240GE at 1121 (0.1% behind), and the Intel Xeon D-1518 at 1121 (0.2% behind). These small deltas place both CPUs in the same overall performance tier, despite the large swings in individual benchmark results.

The Verdict

The data indicates that the Intel Core i3-N300 is the stronger processor for the majority of tested workloads. It wins four of five head-to-head comparisons, including both single-core tests and two of three multi-core tests. The margins in Cinebench R20 are particularly large, with the i3-N300 delivering more than double the score of the i3-4150 in both single-core and multi-core runs. For users whose software relies on the Cinebench R20 workload pattern, the i3-N300 is clearly the better choice.

The Intel Core i3-4150 retains a meaningful advantage in one specific scenario: Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its 2888 score surpasses the i3-N300's 2546 by 11.8%. This means that for sustained, all-core rendering workloads similar to Cinebench R23, the older desktop chip can outperform the newer mobile part. The i3-4150 also carries a dual-channel memory bus and a desktop socket, which may matter for system integration, though the benchmark data itself only shows the R23 multi-core win.

The aggregate scores are close: 1135 for the i3-N300 versus 1119 for the i3-4150, a difference of roughly 1.4%. Both sit at the 32nd percentile, meaning they occupy the same position relative to all CPUs in the database. The choice between them depends entirely on which benchmark pattern matches the intended workload. For general-purpose computing where single-thread responsiveness and modern multi-core scaling matter, the i3-N300 leads. For a specific sustained multi-core workload that resembles Cinebench R23, the i3-4150 has the edge.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-N300 wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core, Cinebench R20 multi-core, Cinebench R20 single-core, and Cinebench R23 single-core. These results cover a mix of single-threaded and multi-threaded tests across three different benchmark versions. The i3-N300's 8 cores and 8 threads, combined with a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, appear to provide strong scaling in most multi-core tests while also delivering superior single-core performance in every test where both processors have a recorded single-core score.

The Intel Core i3-4150 wins only in Cinebench R23 multi-core. Its score of 2888 versus 2546 represents an 11.8% advantage. The i3-4150 has 2 cores and 4 threads with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and no boost clock. The fact that this configuration beats an 8-core part in R23 multi-core suggests that the i3-4150's higher sustained power envelope (54 W versus 7 W for the i3-N300) may allow it to maintain consistent performance over the longer R23 workload. The i3-N300's single-channel memory bus and 7 W TDP likely constrain its all-core performance in that specific test.

For single-core workloads, the i3-N300 is the clear winner. Its 26% lead in R23 single-core and 135.9% lead in R20 single-core show that the Gracemont architecture has a substantial per-thread advantage over the older Haswell design. For multi-core workloads, the outcome depends on the benchmark. In R15 and R20, the i3-N300 wins by 43.4% and 135.1%, respectively. In R23, the i3-4150 wins by 11.8%. This split means that no single processor dominates all multi-core scenarios.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-N300 has an average benchmark score of 1135, while the Intel Core i3-4150 has an average of 1119.

Q: How large is the single-core performance gap in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Core i3-N300 scores 513 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the Intel Core i3-4150 scores 407, giving the i3-N300 a 26% advantage.

Q: Does the Intel Core i3-4150 win any benchmark?

A: Yes, the Intel Core i3-4150 wins Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 2888 against the i3-N300's 2546, an 11.8% lead.

Q: What is the biggest recorded performance difference between the two?

A: The largest difference is in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the Intel Core i3-N300 scores 2849 versus 1212 for the i3-4150, a 135.1% advantage.

Q: How do the two processors compare in terms of overall percentile ranking?

A: Both the Intel Core i3-N300 and the Intel Core i3-4150 are at the 32nd percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: Which processor has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i3-N300 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-4150 has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-N300 uses the Gracemont architecture, built on a 10 nm process node by Intel. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock of 100.00 MHz and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. Its cache configuration includes 96 KB of L1 cache per core, 2 MB of L2 cache per module, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-N300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory through a single-channel memory bus, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. It provides PCIe Gen 3 with 9 lanes (CPU only) and integrates UHD Graphics 770. The processor is designed for the mobile market segment, uses the Intel BGA 1264 socket, and has a TDP of 7 W. Its production status is Active, and its part number is SRMDS.

The Intel Core i3-4150 uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process node by Intel. It has 2 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 3.50 GHz and no boost clock. Its cache configuration includes 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-4150 supports DDR3 memory through a dual-channel memory bus, with a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. It provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) and integrates Intel HD 4400 graphics. The processor is designed for the desktop market segment, uses the Intel Socket 1150, and has a TDP of 54 W. Its production status is End-of-life, and its part number is SR1PJ. The i3-4150 has 1,400 million transistors and a die size of 177 mm².

The i3-N300 has a boost clock while the i3-4150 does not. The i3-N300 uses a newer process node (10 nm versus 22 nm) and a newer architecture (Gracemont versus Haswell). The i3-N300 also has a much larger L3 cache (6 MB versus 3 MB) and higher memory bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s), despite using a single-channel memory bus versus the i3-4150's dual-channel bus.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every major specification field. The Intel Core i3-N300 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i3-4150 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The base clock is 100.00 MHz on the i3-N300 versus 3.50 GHz on the i3-4150, but the i3-N300 adds a 3.70 GHz boost clock while the i3-4150 has no boost capability.

The TDP differs significantly: 7 W for the i3-N300 versus 54 W for the i3-4150. The sockets are different (Intel BGA 1264 versus Intel Socket 1150), as are the market segments (Mobile versus Desktop). The memory support differs: the i3-N300 supports DDR4 and DDR5 with a single-channel bus, while the i3-4150 supports DDR3 with a dual-channel bus. Memory bandwidth is 38.4 GB/s on the i3-N300 and 25.6 GB/s on the i3-4150.

The integrated graphics differ as well: UHD Graphics 770 on the i3-N300 versus Intel HD 4400 on the i3-4150. The PCIe configurations are both Gen 3, but the i3-N300 has 9 lanes while the i3-4150 has 16 lanes. The process node is 10 nm for the i3-N300 and 22 nm for the i3-4150. The i3-4150 has a recorded transistor count of 1,400 million and a die size of 177 mm²; no transistor count or die size is recorded for the i3-N300. The production status is Active for the i3-N300 and End-of-life for the i3-4150. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.