Intel Core i3-4170T vs Intel Processor N95 Comparison

The Intel Core i3-4170T and Intel Processor N95 occupy similar positions in the overall performance distribution, with average benchmark scores of 1072 and 1070 respectively. However, their individual benchmark results reveal starkly different strengths, particularly in single-threaded workloads where the N95 holds a commanding lead. The data shows a 30th percentile ranking for the i3-4170T against all CPUs, while the N95 sits at the 29th percentile, placing both processors in the lower-middle tier of the performance spectrum. Despite the close average scores, the head-to-head benchmark suite demonstrates that the N95 wins all three compared tests, with margins ranging from a modest 3.7% to a decisive 58.9%.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most lopsided result in the comparison comes from Cinebench R23 single-core testing, where the Intel Processor N95 scores 914 against the i3-4170T’s 376. That is a 58.9% advantage for the N95, a margin that dwarfs any other difference between the two parts. The i3-4170T’s Haswell architecture, launched in early 2015, simply cannot match the per-core throughput of the Gracemont-based N95, which benefits from a much newer design and a higher boost clock of 3.40 GHz. In this test, the N95’s single-core score is more than double that of the older chip, indicating a generational leap in instruction efficiency rather than a mere clock-speed bump.

The multicore results are closer, but the N95 still comes out ahead in both available comparisons. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the N95 scores 445 versus the i3-4170T’s 268, a 39.8% gap. This makes sense given that the N95 has four physical cores while the i3-4170T has only two cores with four threads via Hyper-Threading. The N95’s lead narrows substantially in Cinebench R23 multicore, where it scores 2769 against the i3-4170T’s 2667, a margin of just 3.7%. The R23 workload appears to scale differently across these architectures, but the N95 still edges out the older part. Notably, the i3-4170T has no single-core Cinebench R15 result in the data, and the N95 lacks a Cinebench R20 score, so the full picture is limited to three direct comparisons.

In the Geekbench tests, only the i3-4170T has results: 1945 multicore and 972 singlecore. Without a matching N95 score, these numbers cannot be directly compared, but they provide context for the i3-4170T’s overall performance profile. The i3-4170T’s Cinebench R20 results (1120 multicore, 157 singlecore) also stand alone. The benchmark data indicates that the N95 wins all three head-to-head tests, with the largest victory in single-threaded performance and the smallest in R23 multicore. The deltaPct values from the head-to-head list confirm the direction: negative values for the i3-4170T indicate the N95’s superiority in every compared workload.

The Verdict

The Intel Processor N95 is the clear winner in every direct benchmark comparison, making it the stronger processor for most workloads. Its 58.9% lead in Cinebench R23 single-core is the most significant finding, suggesting that any application relying on responsive single-threaded performance—such as lightweight web browsing, office productivity, or basic media playback—will feel markedly faster on the N95. The N95 also dominates in Cinebench R15 multicore with a 39.8% advantage, which points to better throughput in older multi-threaded applications that scale with physical core count.

The i3-4170T never wins a single head-to-head test. Its only comparable score, the Cinebench R23 multicore result, trails by 3.7%, which is small enough that real-world differences would be imperceptible in heavily threaded workloads. However, the i3-4170T’s higher average benchmark score of 1072 versus the N95’s 1070 is a statistical tie, driven by the i3-4170T’s inclusion of Geekbench results that are not available for the N95. The data suggests that the N95 is the better choice for anyone prioritizing modern single-core performance or efficiency, given its 15 W TDP versus the i3-4170T’s 35 W.

For users constrained to the Intel Socket 1150 platform, the i3-4170T remains a functional option, but its 2015 release date and end-of-life production status mean it offers no upgrade path within the same socket. The N95, as an active mobile segment processor, is better suited for compact or low-power systems, although its BGA 1264 socket limits it to pre-built or soldered designs. The verdict is straightforward: the N95 wins on performance across the board, and the i3-4170T only makes sense in legacy systems where the socket dictates the choice.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from radically different eras of Intel design. The i3-4170T uses the Haswell architecture, built on a 22 nm process node with 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The N95 uses Gracemont, part of the Alder Lake-N family, fabricated on a 10 nm process, with no transistor or die size data available. Haswell was designed for desktop systems in 2015, while Gracemont is a low-power mobile architecture released in 2023. The process node shrink from 22 nm to 10 nm is a major factor in the N95’s efficiency and performance per clock.

Core counts differ fundamentally. The i3-4170T has 2 cores and 4 threads, relying on Hyper-Threading to handle four concurrent tasks. The N95 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, with no hyper-threading, but the extra physical cores give it a natural advantage in multi-threaded workloads. Cache hierarchies are also distinct: the i3-4170T offers 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2 per core, plus 3 MB of shared L3. The N95 provides 96 KB of L1 per core, 2 MB of shared L2, and 6 MB of shared L3. The N95’s larger L3 cache (6 MB versus 3 MB) likely contributes to its single-core dominance, as more data can reside closer to the execution units.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i3-4170T pairs with Intel HD 4400, while the N95 uses UHD Graphics 710. No benchmark data exists for either GPU, but the N95’s newer graphics architecture should offer better media decode support. Memory support diverges sharply: the i3-4170T uses dual-channel DDR3 with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the N95 supports DDR4 and DDR5 but only through a single-channel memory bus, albeit with a higher theoretical bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The N95’s single-channel limitation may hurt in memory-sensitive tasks, but the higher bandwidth figure suggests newer memory technologies compensate somewhat.

Specification Differences

The processors differ in several key specification fields. Clock speeds are a stark contrast: the i3-4170T has a fixed base clock of 3.20 GHz with no boost clock listed, while the N95 has a base clock of 100.00 MHz (an unusual figure that likely represents idle or reference frequency) and a boost clock of 3.40 GHz. The i3-4170T’s lack of a boost clock means it runs at a constant 3.20 GHz, whereas the N95 can ramp up to 3.40 GHz when thermal headroom allows.

Thermal design power differs by more than half: the i3-4170T is rated at 35 W, while the N95 draws only 15 W. This makes the N95 far more suitable for fanless or low-power designs. The socket is another major divergence: the i3-4170T uses Intel Socket 1150, a desktop platform with PCIe Gen 3 and 16 CPU lanes. The N95 uses Intel BGA 1264, a soldered mobile package with PCIe Gen 3 but only 9 lanes. The N95’s reduced lane count limits expansion options, while the i3-4170T’s socket allows for a traditional motherboard with multiple slots.

Memory support is a clear differentiator: the i3-4170T only supports DDR3, while the N95 supports DDR4 and DDR5. The memory bus differs as well, with the i3-4170T using dual-channel and the N95 using single-channel. The i3-4170T’s memory bandwidth is 25.6 GB/s, while the N95’s is 38.4 GB/s despite the single-channel configuration. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The i3-4170T has a part number (SR1TC) and a release date of March 2015, while the N95 has no part number listed and released in January 2023. The i3-4170T is end-of-life, whereas the N95 is active. Neither processor has a launch MSRP in the data, and both have locked multipliers.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher single-core score in Cinebench R23?

A: The Intel Processor N95 scores 914, which is 58.9% higher than the Intel Core i3-4170T’s 376.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-threaded Cinebench R15 performance?

A: The N95 scores 445, while the i3-4170T scores 268, giving the N95 a 39.8% advantage.

Q: What is the difference in thermal design power between the two?

A: The i3-4170T has a TDP of 35 W, while the N95 has a TDP of 15 W, making the N95 more power-efficient.

Q: Do both processors support the same memory types?

A: No. The i3-4170T supports only DDR3, while the N95 supports both DDR4 and DDR5.

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Processor N95 has 4 physical cores, while the i3-4170T has 2 physical cores with 4 threads.

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each processor?

A: The i3-4170T has an average benchmark score of 1072, and the N95 has an average of 1070, a difference of only 2 points.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Processor N95 wins in every direct comparison available. Its single-core Cinebench R23 score of 914 versus the i3-4170T’s 376 makes it the clear choice for applications that are latency-sensitive or rely on a single dominant thread. Web browsers, document editors, and light coding tasks would all benefit from the N95’s per-core performance. The N95 also wins in Cinebench R15 multicore with 445 versus 268, suggesting it handles older multi-threaded applications—like video transcoding with older codecs or rendering in legacy software—more effectively. The N95’s 15 W TDP makes it the only option for battery-powered or passively cooled devices, as the i3-4170T’s 35 W rating would require active cooling and more substantial power delivery.

The i3-4170T has no benchmark wins in the head-to-head data. Its only potential advantage lies in the dual-channel memory bus, which provides 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth compared to the N95’s single-channel 38.4 GB/s. While the N95 has a higher theoretical bandwidth, dual-channel DDR3 may offer better latency characteristics in some workloads, though no direct benchmark confirms this. The i3-4170T also has a desktop socket (Intel Socket 1150) that allows for user-replaceable CPUs and standard motherboards, whereas the N95’s BGA 1264 is soldered and not upgradeable. For users with existing DDR3 memory and a Haswell-era motherboard, the i3-4170T could be a drop-in upgrade, but for new builds, the N95’s superior performance and efficiency make it the logical pick. The i3-4170T’s 3 MB L3 cache is half the N95’s 6 MB, further reinforcing the N95’s advantage in data-heavy workloads. In summary, the N95 wins on raw performance, power efficiency, and modern platform support, while the i3-4170T only retains relevance in legacy socket-based systems where the motherboard dictates the processor choice.