Intel Core i3-4350T vs Intel Core i7-4600U Comparison

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-4350T wins every single head-to-head test against the Intel Core i7-4600U. Across five Cinebench workloads, the desktop i3-4350T leads by a consistent margin of roughly 14% to 15%. The i7-4600U, a mobile part, secures zero wins in this comparison. While both CPUs share the same Haswell architecture, 2 cores, 4 threads, and 4 MB of L3 cache, their design goals are fundamentally different, and the performance data reflects that split clearly.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-4350T dominates this matchup in every measurable category. Its advantage is uniform across both single-core and multi-core workloads, which indicates a broad performance lead rather than a niche strength. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i3-4350T scores 2692 against the i7-4600U's 2306, a 14.3% advantage. The single-core gap is nearly identical: the i3-4350T posts 380 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 325 for the i7-4600U, a 14.5% lead. This consistency suggests the i3-4350T simply executes instructions faster per clock, a conclusion supported by its 3.10 GHz base clock compared to the i7-4600U's 2.10 GHz base.

The i7-4600U, however, wins in a category not captured by the benchmark scores: power efficiency. Its 15 W TDP is less than half of the i3-4350T's 35 W TDP. The i7-4600U is also a mobile processor (Intel BGA 1168 socket), whereas the i3-4350T is a desktop part (Intel Socket 1150). For users prioritizing a low-power, compact mobile system, the i7-4600U is the only viable option in this pairing. But for raw compute performance, the i3-4350T wins every single benchmark, making it the clear choice for desktop workloads where power draw is secondary.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's 22 nm Haswell architecture, but they are distinct variants. The i7-4600U uses the Haswell-ULT codename, optimized for ultra-low power consumption in mobile devices. The i3-4350T uses the standard Haswell codename, designed for desktop systems with more thermal headroom. This design difference explains the TDP gap: 15 W for the mobile chip versus 35 W for the desktop chip.

The die size and transistor counts differ substantially. The i7-4600U has 1,300 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, while the i3-4350T packs 1,400 million transistors on a larger 177 mm² die. The larger die and higher transistor count for the desktop chip correlate with its higher clock speeds and performance. Cache configurations are identical: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 4 MB shared L3. Both support DDR3 memory and lack ECC support.

The integrated graphics differ: the i7-4600U features Intel HD 5000, while the i3-4350T ships with Intel HD 4600. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The i3-4350T also carries a Gen 3 PCIe interface with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i7-4600U's PCIe information is not listed. The i3-4350T supports dual-channel memory with a 25.6 GB/s memory bandwidth, while the i7-4600U's memory bus details are absent from the data.

The Verdict

From the benchmark data, the Intel Core i3-4350T is the definitive performance winner. It beats the i7-4600U in all five Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 14.3% to 14.5%. The i3-4350T also has a higher base clock (3.10 GHz vs 2.10 GHz) and a larger die with more transistors. For any user building a desktop system where performance is the primary criterion, the i3-4350T is the correct choice based on this data.

The i7-4600U is only preferable in scenarios requiring minimal power consumption. Its 15 W TDP is a significant advantage for mobile or embedded applications where thermal and battery constraints dominate. However, the data shows zero performance wins for the i7-4600U. If the workload requires the i7-4600U's socket (Intel BGA 1168) or its specific mobile form factor, it is the only option. Otherwise, the i3-4350T's consistent 14% performance lead across every benchmark makes it the superior processor for desktop use.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-4350T wins all multi-core tests. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2692 versus 2306 for the i7-4600U, a 14.3% advantage. Similar margins appear in Cinebench R20 (1130 vs 968) and Cinebench R15 (271 vs 232).

Q: Is the i7-4600U better for single-core tasks?

A: No. The i3-4350T also wins every single-core test. It scores 380 in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 325 for the i7-4600U, and 159 versus 136 in Cinebench R20 single-core, both roughly 14.5% higher.

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

A: Yes. Both the i7-4600U and the i3-4350T have 2 cores and 4 threads. They also share the same L3 cache size of 4 MB shared, and identical 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 caches per core.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The i7-4600U has a 15 W TDP, while the i3-4350T has a 35 W TDP. The i7-4600U consumes less than half the power of the i3-4350T.

Q: Are these processors from the same architecture generation?

A: Yes, both are built on the 22 nm Haswell architecture. However, the i7-4600U uses the Haswell-ULT codename (mobile), while the i3-4350T uses the standard Haswell codename (desktop).

Q: Do the processors support the same memory type?

A: Both support DDR3 memory and neither supports ECC. The i3-4350T has a listed dual-channel memory bus with 25.6 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-4600U's memory bus details are not provided.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent. The i3-4350T wins all five Cinebench tests, with deltas ranging from -14.3% to -14.5% (negative values indicate the i7-4600U losing). In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-4350T scores 271 versus 232 for the i7-4600U, a -14.4% delta. The R20 multi-core test shows 1130 versus 968, a -14.3% delta. The R20 single-core test is 159 versus 136, a -14.5% delta.

The largest absolute margin appears in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where the i3-4350T scores 2692 versus 2306, a difference of 386 points. The smallest absolute gap is in Cinebench R23 single-core, with 380 versus 325, a 55-point difference. The i7-4600U's best relative performance is in the multi-core tests, but even there it trails by over 14%. This uniformity suggests the i3-4350T's higher base clock (3.10 GHz vs 2.10 GHz) provides a consistent advantage across all workload types.

The average benchmark scores place these two CPUs nearly identically in the broader market: the i7-4600U averages 931, and the i3-4350T averages 926, a difference of only 0.5%. Both sit at the 25th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals for the i7-4600U include the Intel Core i7-870 (928, +0.3%) and the Intel Core i5-4288U (927, +0.4%). For the i3-4350T, the nearest rivals are the i5-4288U (927, -0.1%) and the Intel Celeron G6900TE (925, +0.2%). Despite their similar average scores, the head-to-head benchmarks show a decisive i3-4350T victory.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The i7-4600U has a base clock of 2.10 GHz with a boost clock of 3.30 GHz, while the i3-4350T has a base clock of 3.10 GHz and no boost clock listed. The TDP differs dramatically: 15 W for the mobile i7-4600U versus 35 W for the desktop i3-4350T.

The sockets are incompatible: Intel BGA 1168 for the i7-4600U versus Intel Socket 1150 for the i3-4350T. The market segments reflect this, with the i7-4600U listed as Mobile and the i3-4350T as Desktop. The i3-4350T has a production status of End-of-life, while the i7-4600U's status is not specified. The release dates differ, with the i7-4600U launching in August 2013 and the i3-4350T in May 2014.

Transistor counts and die sizes also differ: the i7-4600U has 1,300 million transistors on a 118 mm² die, while the i3-4350T has 1,400 million transistors on a 177 mm² die. The integrated graphics are different (HD 5000 vs HD 4600). The i3-4350T lists a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s and a PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, neither of which is listed for the i7-4600U. The i3-4350T has a launch MSRP of $138 and a part number SR1JUSR1PA; the i7-4600U has no listed launch MSRP or part number.