Intel Core i3-4160T vs Intel Core i3-4350 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-4350 wins every single recorded head-to-head test against the Intel Core i3-4160T. In five direct comparisons across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, the i3-4350 takes all five wins, leaving the i3-4160T with zero victories.

The margin is remarkably consistent. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-4160T scores 265 points while the i3-4350 posts 309 points. That is a 14.2% deficit for the lower-clocked part. Move to Cinebench R20 multicore, and the gap widens slightly: 1106 for the i3-4160T versus 1291 for the i3-4350, a 14.3% difference. The single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4160T manages 156 points, while the i3-4350 reaches 182 points, again a 14.3% gap. Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern: multicore sees 2635 versus 3076, and single-core sees 372 versus 434. Every delta sits at 14.2% or 14.3%, indicating a consistent clock-speed-driven advantage rather than any architectural variation.

The i3-4160T does have one additional benchmark entry in the database: Geekbench multicore at 1840 and single-core at 926. The i3-4350 has no recorded Geekbench scores, so direct comparison on that test is not possible. However, the average benchmark score tells a broader story. The i3-4160T averages 1043 points across its recorded tests, while the i3-4350 averages 1058 points. That is only a 1.4% difference in aggregate performance, which is far smaller than the consistent 14% deltas in Cinebench. This suggests that the Geekbench results for the i3-4160T are relatively strong, pulling its average closer to the i3-4350 than the dedicated render workloads indicate.

Looking at the nearest rivals in the database provides additional context. The i3-4160T sits at the 29th percentile of all CPUs, with an average score of 1043. Its closest competitor is the AMD Ryzen 7 PRO 3700U, which scores 1041, a 0.2% lead for the i3-4160T. The Intel Pentium Gold G5620 and AMD PRO A10-9700 both score 1045, a 0.2% advantage over the i3-4160T. The Intel Core i5-6350HQ scores 1046, also 0.2% ahead. These are all effectively ties, placing the i3-4160T in a dense cluster of similarly performing processors.

The i3-4350 also sits at the 29th percentile, with an average of 1058. Its nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 5 2500U at exactly 1058, a 0% delta. The Intel Core i7-2760QM scores 1057, a 0.1% lead for the i3-4350. The AMD FX-8320E scores 1059, a 0.1% deficit. The Intel Pentium G4600 scores 1056, a 0.2% lead. So while the i3-4350 has a higher average score, both parts occupy the same performance tier relative to the broader market. The percentile is identical at 29, indicating that neither part leaps into a higher performance class despite the consistent head-to-head advantage.

The Verdict

The data directs a clear conclusion: if the choice is purely about benchmark performance, the Intel Core i3-4350 is the stronger processor. It wins every recorded head-to-head test by a consistent margin of roughly 14%. The multicore render workloads in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 all show the i3-4350 pulling ahead with the same relative gap, and the single-core tests mirror that exactly. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the i3-4160T comes out ahead.

The i3-4160T does have a notable advantage in power consumption. Its thermal design power is 35 watts, while the i3-4350 draws 54 watts. That is a substantial difference, and it means the i3-4160T is the better choice for low-power or compact systems where heat dissipation and energy draw are primary concerns. The i3-4160T also carries a lower tier of integrated graphics, the Intel HD 4400, whereas the i3-4350 has the Intel HD 4600. For users relying on the integrated GPU, the i3-4350 likely provides the better experience, though the recorded data does not include graphics benchmarks.

The average benchmark scores, however, tell a more nuanced verdict. The i3-4160T averages 1043 points, and the i3-4350 averages 1058 points. That is only a 1.5% difference in the overall average. In everyday workloads that do not stress all cores continuously, the gap may be less noticeable than the Cinebench deltas suggest. But for sustained multithreaded work, the i3-4350 shows a decisive edge.

Who should pick which? The i3-4350 is the pick for anyone prioritizing raw compute speed, especially in rendering or other multithreaded tasks. The i3-4160T is the pick for those building extremely power-efficient desktops or small-form-factor machines where the 35-watt envelope is a hard requirement. The i3-4160T does not sacrifice much in the average score, trailing by only 1.5% overall, which makes it a viable alternative if power efficiency trumps peak performance. From the recorded data, the i3-4350 is the faster part, and the i3-4160T is the more frugal part.

Architecture Differences

The two processors share the same fundamental design. Both are built on the Haswell architecture, with the same codename and the same 22 nm process node manufactured by Intel. Both use the Intel Socket 1150, and both have the same transistor count of 1,400 million and the same die size of 177 mm². The core configuration is identical: 2 physical cores and 4 threads, meaning both support Hyper-Threading.

The cache layout differs in one key respect. The per-core L1 cache is 64 KB and the L2 cache is 256 KB, and these are identical in both. The L3 cache, however, is not. The i3-4160T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4350 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. That extra 1 MB of L3 could contribute to the i3-4350's performance advantage, though the clock speed difference is likely the dominant factor.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i3-4160T ships with Intel HD 4400, while the i3-4350 ships with Intel HD 4600. Both are integrated GPU solutions, but the HD 4600 is the higher tier of the two. The database does not record direct graphics benchmarks, so the actual performance delta between these iGPUs is not quantified here.

Memory support is the same: both use DDR3 in dual-channel configuration. Neither supports ECC memory. Both have PCIe Gen 3 connectivity. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not an option for either part. The production status for the i3-4160T is listed as Active, while the i3-4350 has no production status recorded in the database.

The release dates differ slightly. The i3-4160T was released on 2014-07-20, while the i3-4350 came earlier, on 2014-04-30. Both are desktop parts from the Haswell generation.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications. The base clock is the most significant: the i3-4160T runs at 3.10 GHz, while the i3-4350 runs at 3.60 GHz. Neither has a boost clock, so the base clock is the maximum sustained frequency. The TDP differs as noted: 35 watts for the i3-4160T versus 54 watts for the i3-4350. The L3 cache differs: 3 MB shared versus 4 MB shared. The integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 4400 versus Intel HD 4600. The release date differs: 2014-07-20 versus 2014-04-30. The production status is Active for the i3-4160T, while the i3-4350's status is not recorded.

All other specifications are identical: 2 cores, 4 threads, same socket, same architecture, same process node, same foundry, same transistor count, same die size, same L1 and L2 cache, same memory support, same memory bus, same ECC support, same PCIe generation, same market segment, and both have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the most head-to-head benchmarks?

A: The Intel Core i3-4350 wins all 5 recorded head-to-head tests. The i3-4160T wins zero.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i3-4160T scores 2635, while the i3-4350 scores 3076. That is a 14.3% difference.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i3-4160T has an average benchmark score of 1043, while the i3-4350 has an average of 1058. The difference is approximately 1.5%.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i3-4160T has a TDP of 35 watts, while the i3-4350 has a TDP of 54 watts.

Q: Do the processors have the same cache?

A: No. The i3-4160T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4350 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. L1 and L2 are the same.

Q: Which processor has the faster base clock?

A: The i3-4350 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz, while the i3-4160T has a base clock of 3.10 GHz. Neither has a boost clock.

Q: What integrated graphics do they use?

A: The i3-4160T uses Intel HD 4400, while the i3-4350 uses Intel HD 4600.