Intel Core i3-4350T vs Intel Core i5-4288U Comparison

The Intel Core i5-4288U and Intel Core i3-4350T are both dual-core, four-thread Haswell parts, but they target very different platforms: one is a 28-watt mobile chip on BGA 1168, the other a 35-watt desktop chip on Socket 1150. Their average benchmark scores are nearly identical (927 vs. 926), yet the head-to-head results tell a far more one-sided story. Across every single benchmark in the comparison set, the Core i3-4350T wins decisively, posting a consistent performance advantage of roughly 17 percent over the Core i5-4288U in both single-core and multi-core workloads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i3-4350T sweeps all five head-to-head benchmarks, and the margin is remarkably uniform. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-4350T scores 271 against the i5-4288U’s 225, a 17 percent gap. That pattern repeats almost exactly in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i3-4350T posts 1130 versus 939 (a 16.9 percent lead), and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it hits 2692 against 2237 (also a 16.9 percent advantage). The desktop chip’s higher base clock of 3.10 GHz — compared to the mobile chip’s 2.60 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost — appears to be the driving factor, as both processors share the same Haswell architecture and 22 nm process node.

Single-core performance tells the same story with even slightly larger margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-4350T scores 159 versus the i5-4288U’s 132, a 17 percent gap. Cinebench R23 single-core shows the i3-4350T at 380 versus 315, a 17.1 percent lead. The consistency of these deltas across different Cinebench versions — all hovering between 16.9 and 17.1 percent — suggests a fixed architectural and clock-speed advantage rather than workload-specific variance. Notably, the i5-4288U’s boost clock matches the i3-4350T’s base clock at 3.10 GHz, yet the desktop part still wins single-core by a wide margin, indicating that sustained clock behavior and thermal headroom favor the 35-watt desktop design.

The i5-4288U’s lone bright spot comes from Geekbench, where it posts 1745 multi-core and 896 single-core scores. However, no corresponding Geekbench results exist for the i3-4350T in the head-to-head set, so a direct comparison is unavailable. The overall win count is decisive: 5 wins for the i3-4350T, 0 for the i5-4288U. The nearest-rival data confirms these two chips are extremely close in aggregate — the i5-4288U’s avgBenchmarkScore is 927 and the i3-4350T’s is 926, with a deltaPct of just 0.1 percent — but that aggregate similarity masks the i3-4350T’s consistent superiority in every measured Cinebench workload.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-4350T wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests: R15 (271 vs. 225), R20 (1130 vs. 939), and R23 (2692 vs. 2237). Its advantage ranges from 16.9 to 17 percent.

Q: Does the i5-4288U have a boost clock advantage?

A: The i5-4288U has a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, which matches the i3-4350T’s base clock of 3.10 GHz. However, the i3-4350T still wins all single-core tests by roughly 17 percent, indicating the mobile chip cannot sustain its boost effectively.

Q: How do these chips compare on average benchmark scores?

A: They are nearly identical in aggregate. The i5-4288U has an avgBenchmarkScore of 927, while the i3-4350T scores 926, a difference of just 0.1 percent. Both sit at the 25th percentile of all CPUs.

Q: What are the TDP differences between the two?

A: The i5-4288U has a TDP of 28 watts (mobile), while the i3-4350T has a TDP of 35 watts (desktop). This 7-watt difference likely explains the i3-4350T’s ability to maintain higher sustained clocks.

Q: Do these processors support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the Intel Core i5-4288U and the Intel Core i3-4350T have eccMemory set to false.

Q: Which processor has more L3 cache?

A: The i3-4350T has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i5-4288U has 3 MB. The i3-4350T also has a larger die size (177 mm² vs. 118 mm²), despite both using 1,400 million transistors on a 22 nm node.

Where Each One Wins

The i3-4350T is the clear choice for raw compute performance. Every Cinebench test — single-core and multi-core alike — falls to the desktop part by a margin of roughly 17 percent. This makes it the superior option for CPU-bound tasks such as video encoding, 3D rendering, and any workload that scales with sustained clock speed. Its 4 MB L3 cache versus 3 MB on the i5-4288U also provides a small capacity advantage for frequently accessed data. The desktop socket (Socket 1150) and 35-watt TDP suggest it is designed for systems with active cooling and consistent power delivery, where the higher base clock can be maintained indefinitely.

The i5-4288U’s advantages are more about platform than performance. Its 28-watt TDP makes it suitable for compact mobile devices where thermal headroom is limited. It also features a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, which can provide short bursts of higher performance when needed, though the benchmark data shows it cannot match the i3-4350T’s sustained output. The mobile chip’s integrated graphics is the Intel HD 5100, while the desktop chip uses the Intel HD 4600; however, no graphics benchmarks are provided in the data, so relative GPU performance cannot be assessed. For users prioritizing power efficiency and mobility over compute throughput, the i5-4288U is the only sensible pick — but for anyone measuring performance, the i3-4350T wins outright.

Specification Differences

The two chips diverge most significantly in clock speed and platform. The i5-4288U has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.10 GHz, while the i3-4350T has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and no boost capability (boostClock is null). TDP differs by 7 watts: 28 for the mobile part, 35 for the desktop part. Sockets are incompatible — the i5-4288U uses Intel BGA 1168 (soldered), while the i3-4350T uses Intel Socket 1150 (LGA). The i3-4350T is marked as end-of-life, whereas the i5-4288U has no production status listed.

Cache and die size also differ. The i5-4288U has 3 MB of shared L3 cache and a die size of 118 mm²; the i3-4350T has 4 MB of shared L3 and a die size of 177 mm². Both share the same 22 nm process node, 1,400 million transistors, and dual-channel DDR3 memory support. The i3-4350T lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s and a PCIe configuration of Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only); the i5-4288U does not list memory bus, memory bandwidth, or PCIe details in the data. The i3-4350T has a launch MSRP of $138; the i5-4288U has no launch MSRP listed. Both use the same L1 cache (64 KB per core) and L2 cache (256 KB per core), and both have unlocked multipliers set to false.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel’s Haswell architecture with the same 22 nm process node and 1,400 million transistors, but the physical implementations differ substantially. The i5-4288U’s die is 118 mm², while the i3-4350T’s die is 177 mm² — a 50 percent larger silicon area for the desktop chip, despite identical transistor counts. The larger die likely accommodates the additional 1 MB of L3 cache (4 MB vs. 3 MB) and potentially different uncore components, though the core count (2 cores, 4 threads) and per-core cache sizes (64 KB L1, 256 KB L2) are identical.

The market segments are fundamentally different: the i5-4288U is a mobile processor (28W TDP, BGA 1168 socket) with a 2013 release date, while the i3-4350T is a desktop processor (35W TDP, Socket 1150) released in 2014. The i5-4288U is part of the Core i5 generation and carries the part number SR189, while the i3-4350T is a Core i3 with part number SR1JUSR1PA. Both support only DDR3 memory and lack ECC support. The integrated graphics differ (HD 5100 on the mobile chip, HD 4600 on the desktop chip), though no graphics benchmarks are available in the data. The i3-4350T also explicitly lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 CPU lanes and dual-channel memory with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, whereas the i5-4288U’s data omits these details. In terms of sustained compute capability, the 17 percent benchmark gap between the two is best explained by the i3-4350T’s higher base clock and desktop-class power envelope, which allows it to run at 3.10 GHz without thermal throttling — a luxury the 28-watt mobile chip cannot afford.