Intel Core i3-4150T vs Intel Core i3-4360T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record is unambiguous here. The Intel Core i3-4360T wins every single head-to-head test in the database. Out of five recorded comparisons, the i3-4360T takes all five, while the i3-4150T records zero wins. There is no workload category, single-threaded or multi-threaded, where the i3-4150T manages to pull ahead.

That does not mean the i3-4150T is without a role. Its advantage is not in performance, but in positioning. Both processors sit at the same 35W TDP, so the i3-4150T is not saving power. The difference is that the i3-4150T still delivers usable dual-core, four-thread performance for basic desktop tasks, and it does so with a lower base clock of 2.90 GHz versus 3.20 GHz on the i3-4360T. If the workload is light, such as office documents, web browsing, or legacy applications, the i3-4150T will not feel crippled, but the data does not show any scenario where it wins.

The i3-4360T, by contrast, is the clear pick for anyone who needs the maximum available performance from a 35W Haswell dual-core. It carries the same core and thread count, but its higher clock speed and larger L3 cache translate into consistent gains across every Cinebench version recorded. For a compact desktop or a low-power build where every bit of CPU throughput matters, the i3-4360T is the one that wins the performance argument.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Haswell architecture, using the same 22 nm process node from Intel. Each integrates 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. They share the same socket, Intel Socket 1150, and the same dual-core, four-thread configuration. Both support DDR3 memory through a dual-channel memory bus, both run at PCIe Gen 3, and neither has an unlocked multiplier. ECC memory is not supported on either part.

The first meaningful difference is clock speed. The i3-4150T runs at 2.90 GHz, while the i3-4360T runs at 3.20 GHz. Neither processor has a boost clock, so these are fixed operating frequencies. That 0.30 GHz gap is the primary driver of the performance difference in single-threaded tests.

The second difference is cache. The i3-4150T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4360T has 4 MB. Both have the same per-core L1 and L2 configuration: 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core. The extra 1 MB of L3 on the i3-4360T helps with repeated data access patterns and contributes to its lead in multi-threaded workloads.

The integrated graphics also differ. The i3-4150T uses Intel HD 4400, while the i3-4360T uses Intel HD 4600. This is a relevant distinction for builds without a discrete GPU, as the HD 4600 is the higher-tier integrated solution in Intel's Haswell lineup. The i3-4360T also has a newer record in the database, with a release date of July 2014 versus April 2014 for the i3-4150T. Production status for the i3-4360T is listed as active, while the i3-4150T has no production status recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results form a consistent pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-4150T scores 244, while the i3-4360T scores 282. That is a 13.5% deficit for the i3-4150T. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 1018 versus 1175, a 13.4% gap. The same delta appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core: 2425 versus 2799, again 13.4% behind.

Single-threaded results follow the same trend. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4150T scores 143, while the i3-4360T scores 165, a 13.3% difference. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the margin is 342 versus 395, which is 13.4% in favor of the i3-4360T.

What is notable is how uniform the delta is across every test. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the i3-4360T maintains roughly a 13% lead. This suggests the performance gap is driven mainly by the clock speed and cache difference, not by any workload-specific architectural advantage. The i3-4150T is not better at anything measured; it is simply slower everywhere by a consistent margin.

For context, the i3-4150T's average benchmark score is 975, which puts it exactly level with the AMD Athlon X4 840, the Intel Core i3-4130, and the AMD A10-7870K, all at 975 with a 0 delta. The i3-4360T's average score is 963, which is within 0.1% of the AMD A8-9600 and 0.4% of the Intel Celeron N5100 and Intel Xeon X5570. Both processors land at the 26th percentile of all CPUs in the database, meaning they serve a similar market segment of entry-level and low-power desktops.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-threaded workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-4360T wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2799 versus 2425 for the i3-4150T, a 13.4% advantage.

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

A: No. The database records five head-to-head benchmarks, and the i3-4360T wins all five. The i3-4150T has zero wins.

Q: Do both processors have the same power consumption?

A: Yes, both are rated at 35W TDP. The higher clock speed of the i3-4360T does not increase the thermal design power.

Q: What is the difference in integrated graphics?

A: The i3-4150T has Intel HD 4400, while the i3-4360T has Intel HD 4600. The HD 4600 is the higher-tier integrated graphics option.

Q: Are the cache sizes different?

A: Yes. The i3-4150T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4360T has 4 MB. L1 and L2 caches are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both are listed with ECC memory support as false.

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors:

• Base Clock: i3-4150T at 2.90 GHz, i3-4360T at 3.20 GHz
• L3 Cache: i3-4150T has 3 MB shared, i3-4360T has 4 MB shared
• Integrated Graphics: i3-4150T has Intel HD 4400, i3-4360T has Intel HD 4600
• Release Date: i3-4150T on April 30, 2014, i3-4360T on July 20, 2014
• Production Status: i3-4360T is active, i3-4150T has no recorded status

All other recorded specifications are identical: 2 cores, 4 threads, 35W TDP, Intel Socket 1150, Haswell architecture, 22 nm process, 1,400 million transistors, 177 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, DDR3 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, PCIe Gen 3, no ECC, no unlocked multiplier.

The Verdict

The choice between these two processors is straightforward based on the recorded data. The Intel Core i3-4360T is the superior part in every measured benchmark. It delivers a consistent 13.4% advantage in multi-core tests and roughly 13.3% in single-core tests. The extra 0.30 GHz of clock speed and the additional 1 MB of L3 cache translate directly into measurable performance gains across all Cinebench versions in the database.

For a builder assembling a low-power 35W desktop on Socket 1150, the i3-4360T is the better pick if performance is the priority. It offers the best available throughput within the same thermal envelope and includes the higher-tier HD 4600 integrated graphics. There is no workload category in the database where the i3-4150T pulls ahead.

The i3-4150T is not a bad processor in absolute terms. Its average benchmark score of 975 puts it on par with several other entry-level chips, including the AMD Athlon X4 840 and Intel Core i3-4130. It will handle everyday computing tasks without issue. But when compared directly to the i3-4360T, it is simply the slower option in every way that the benchmarks measure.

If the build requires the absolute lowest clock speed for some niche reason, or if the i3-4150T is available at a significantly lower price, it could be justified, but the database does not contain any performance data supporting that choice. For anyone who wants the faster of these two Haswell dual-cores, the i3-4360T is the clear winner.