Intel Core i3-4170T vs Intel Core i3-4350 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unusually one-sided in this comparison. The Intel Core i3-4350 wins every single recorded benchmark against the Intel Core i3-4170T. Across the five head-to-head tests, the i3-4350 takes all five wins, while the i3-4170T records zero wins. This is not a case of one chip winning in multi-threaded workloads and the other in single-threaded tasks; the i3-4350 dominates both categories.

The i3-4170T does have one clear domain where it is the more sensible choice: power-constrained systems. Its thermal design power is 35 watts, compared to 54 watts for the i3-4350. That is a meaningful difference for compact desktop builds, low-profile cooling solutions, or systems where heat output and fan noise are priorities. The i3-4170T is also the later release, arriving in the database with a release date of 2015-03-29, while the i3-4350 was released on 2014-04-30. However, later release does not translate into better performance here.

For anyone prioritizing raw compute performance, the i3-4350 wins outright. The performance gap is consistent across every test, with the i3-4350 leading by roughly 13 percent in all five head-to-head benchmarks. That consistency suggests a fundamental advantage in clock speed and cache size rather than any workload-specific optimization.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture. Both are Intel parts built on the Haswell microarchitecture, using the 22 nm process node, and produced by Intel as the foundry. Both have 2 physical cores with 4 threads via Hyper-Threading, and both use the Intel Socket 1150. Neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both share the same transistor count of 1,400 million and the same die size of 177 mm². They also share the same L1 cache of 64 KB per core and L2 cache of 256 KB per core.

The architectural differences are concentrated in a few areas. The i3-4350 has a larger L3 cache: 4 MB shared, versus 3 MB shared on the i3-4170T. That extra 1 MB of shared cache can help reduce repeated trips to memory in workloads with moderate working sets. The base clock also differs. The i3-4170T runs at 3.20 GHz, while the i3-4350 runs at 3.60 GHz. Neither processor has a boost clock, so these base clocks are the maximum sustained frequencies.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i3-4170T comes with Intel HD 4400, while the i3-4350 carries Intel HD 4600. The memory support is DDR3 in both cases, with dual-channel memory bus on both. The i3-4170T lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s, while the i3-4350 has no memory bandwidth figure recorded. PCIe support is Gen 3 on both, though the i3-4170T specifies 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-4350 simply lists Gen 3 without lane details. ECC memory is not supported on either chip.

The power envelope is the largest structural difference. The i3-4170T is a low-power variant at 35 watts, while the i3-4350 is a standard desktop part at 54 watts. That 19-watt difference explains much of the clock speed gap and, consequently, the performance gap.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-4350 has a base clock of 3.60 GHz, which is higher than the 3.20 GHz base clock of the Intel Core i3-4170T. Neither processor has a boost clock.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both the i3-4170T and the i3-4350 have 2 physical cores and 4 threads. Both are dual-core parts with Hyper-Threading.

Q: How much L3 cache does each processor have?

A: The i3-4170T has 3 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4350 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core.

Q: Which processor is more power-efficient?

A: The i3-4170T has a thermal design power of 35 watts, compared to 54 watts for the i3-4350. This makes the i3-4170T the lower-power option, though it comes with a performance cost.

Q: Are these processors from the same architecture generation?

A: Yes, both are Haswell parts on the 22 nm process node, using the Intel Socket 1150. They share the same core design but differ in clock speed, cache size, and integrated graphics.

Q: Which processor wins in single-core performance?

A: The i3-4350 wins in single-core tests. In Cinebench R20 single-core, it scores 182 versus 157 for the i3-4170T, a delta of 13.7 percent. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 434 versus 376, a delta of 13.4 percent.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in the following recorded specifications:

• Base Clock: The i3-4170T runs at 3.20 GHz; the i3-4350 runs at 3.60 GHz.
• TDP: The i3-4170T is rated at 35 watts; the i3-4350 is rated at 54 watts.
• L3 Cache: The i3-4170T has 3 MB shared; the i3-4350 has 4 MB shared.
• Integrated Graphics: The i3-4170T uses Intel HD 4400; the i3-4350 uses Intel HD 4600.
• Memory Bandwidth: The i3-4170T lists 25.6 GB/s; the i3-4350 has no memory bandwidth figure recorded.
• PCIe: The i3-4170T specifies Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only); the i3-4350 lists only Gen 3.
• Release Date: The i3-4170T was released on 2015-03-29; the i3-4350 was released on 2014-04-30.
• Production Status: The i3-4170T is marked as end-of-life; the i3-4350 has no production status recorded.
• Part Number: The i3-4170T has part number SR1TC; the i3-4350 has no part number recorded.

All other recorded specifications are identical: 2 cores, 4 threads, Haswell architecture, 22 nm process node, Intel foundry, 1,400 million transistors, 177 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 cache per core, 256 KB L2 cache per core, DDR3 memory support, dual-channel memory bus, no ECC memory support, Intel Socket 1150, and locked multipliers.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a uniform performance advantage for the i3-4350 across all five recorded tests. The deltas are remarkably consistent, all falling between 13.2 and 13.7 percent.

In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-4170T scores 268, while the i3-4350 scores 309. That is a 13.3 percent advantage for the i3-4350. Moving to Cinebench R20 multicore, the i3-4170T scores 1120, and the i3-4350 scores 1291, a 13.2 percent lead. The single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4170T records 157, while the i3-4350 records 182, a 13.7 percent difference, the largest gap in the entire set. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i3-4170T scores 376 against 434 for the i3-4350, a 13.4 percent difference. Finally, in Cinebench R23 multicore, the i3-4170T scores 2667, and the i3-4350 scores 3076, another 13.3 percent gap.

For context on where these chips sit in the broader market, the i3-4170T has an average benchmark score of 1072 and sits at the 30th percentile of all CPUs. Its nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-5287U at an identical average score of 1072, the AMD Athlon X4 880K at 1071 (0.1 percent behind), the Intel Core i5-2310 at 1073 (0.1 percent ahead), and the AMD Opteron 3380 at 1071 (0.1 percent behind). The i3-4350 has an average benchmark score of 1058 and sits at the 29th percentile. Its nearest rivals include the AMD Ryzen 5 2500U at an identical 1058, the Intel Core i7-2760QM at 1057 (0.1 percent behind), the AMD FX-8320E at 1059 (0.1 percent ahead), and the Intel Pentium G4600 at 1056 (0.2 percent behind).

Interestingly, despite the i3-4350 winning every head-to-head test by roughly 13 percent, its average benchmark score of 1058 is actually slightly lower than the i3-4170T's average of 1072. This is because the two parts draw on different benchmark sets: the i3-4170T has additional Geekbench results recorded, including a multicore score of 1945 and a single-core score of 972, which are not present in the i3-4350's recorded data. The head-to-head Cinebench tests remain the most direct comparison available.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case. If the priority is maximum compute performance in a standard desktop build, the Intel Core i3-4350 is the stronger choice. It wins every recorded head-to-head benchmark by a consistent margin of approximately 13 percent, with the largest single advantage of 13.7 percent in Cinebench R20 single-core. Its higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and larger 4 MB L3 cache give it a structural advantage over the i3-4170T in both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads.

If the priority is power efficiency or low-heat operation, the Intel Core i3-4170T is the appropriate pick. Its 35 watt TDP is substantially lower than the 54 watt TDP of the i3-4350, making it suitable for compact or passively cooled systems where thermal output matters more than raw speed. The performance cost is real, however: the i3-4170T trails by roughly 13 percent in every Cinebench test, and it also carries the older Intel HD 4400 integrated graphics versus the HD 4600 on the i3-4350.

There is no scenario in the recorded data where the i3-4170T outperforms the i3-4350 in compute benchmarks. The only advantages for the i3-4170T are power consumption, a later release date, and a recorded part number. For anyone building a desktop system without strict power limits, the i3-4350 is the correct choice. For anyone building a low-power system, the i3-4170T accepts a meaningful performance reduction in exchange for a much lower thermal envelope.