CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i5-3475S and Intel Core i3-6320 are two desktop processors from different eras, targeting similar performance tiers but achieving them through contrasting designs. The i5-3475S is a 2012 Ivy Bridge part with four physical cores, while the i3-6320 is a 2015 Skylake part with two cores and Hyper-Threading. Benchmark data shows the newer i3-6320 edges out the older i5 in every tested workload, though the margins are consistently small, ranging from 1.7% to 1.9%. This makes the choice between them a matter of platform preference and specific use-case priorities rather than a clear performance knockout.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-3475S has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, while the Intel Core i3-6320 has 2 physical cores and 4 threads (thanks to Hyper-Threading).

Q: How do their multi-core benchmark scores compare?

A: The i3-6320 wins all multi-core tests, but by narrow margins. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 3753 versus the i5-3475S's 3685, a 1.8% difference. The i3 also leads in Cinebench R20 multi-core (1576 vs 1547) and Cinebench R15 multi-core (378 vs 371).

Q: Is there a significant single-core performance gap?

A: No, the single-core results are nearly identical. The i3-6320 leads by 1.9% in Cinebench R15 single-core (53 vs 52) and by 1.7% in Cinebench R23 single-core (529 vs 520). The i3-6320's higher base clock of 3.90 GHz helps it stay ahead despite the i5's boost capability.

Q: Which processor has a newer architecture and process node?

A: The i3-6320 uses the Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process, while the i5-3475S uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process. The i3-6320 also has a smaller die size at 150 mm² compared to 160 mm² for the i5.

Q: Do they support different memory types?

A: Yes. The i5-3475S supports DDR3 memory, while the i3-6320 supports DDR4 memory with a rated bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. Both use a dual-channel memory bus.

Q: What are their average benchmark scores and percentiles?

A: The i5-3475S has an average benchmark score of 1091 and sits at the 30th percentile of all CPUs. The i3-6320 has an average score of 1085 and also sits at the 30th percentile. This places them in the same overall performance bracket.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent a significant generational leap in Intel's design philosophy. The i5-3475S is built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, which was Intel's 22 nm process with a transistor count of 1,400 million and a die size of 160 mm². It belongs to the Core i5 generation from that era. In contrast, the i3-6320 uses the Skylake architecture on a 14 nm process, also with 1,400 million transistors but in a smaller 150 mm² die. This newer process node allows for higher clock speeds at lower power consumption.

The core count difference is fundamental. The i5-3475S offers 4 physical cores with no Hyper-Threading, meaning 4 threads total. The i3-6320 has 2 physical cores but supports Hyper-Threading, yielding 4 threads as well. This means the i3 has to rely on thread scheduling and higher clock speeds to match the i5's raw core count. The i5-3475S has a base clock of 2.90 GHz with a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, while the i3-6320 runs at a fixed 3.90 GHz with no boost clock listed.

Cache configurations also differ. The i5-3475S has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. The i3-6320 has the same L1 and L2 per-core allocations but only 4 MB of shared L3 cache. This smaller cache could impact workloads that benefit from large shared pools, though the i3's higher clock speed may compensate.

Memory support is a major architectural split. The i5-3475S uses DDR3, while the i3-6320 uses DDR4 with a rated memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. Both support dual-channel configurations. The integrated graphics also differ: the i5-3475S has Intel HD 4000, while the i3-6320 has Intel HD 530, which is a more capable integrated solution from the Skylake generation.

The sockets are incompatible: the i5-3475S uses Intel Socket 1155, and the i3-6320 uses Intel Socket 1151. Both processors offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers, preventing manual overclocking.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data is remarkably consistent: the i3-6320 wins every single benchmark, but by a very narrow margin. This is a rare case where a newer, higher-clocked dual-core consistently outperforms an older quad-core, but not by a meaningful amount.

In Cinebench R15, the i3-6320 scores 378 in multi-core versus 371 for the i5-3475S, a 1.9% advantage. The single-core test shows 53 versus 52, also a 1.9% lead. These are the largest deltas in the entire comparison, but they are still within the noise of most real-world testing.

Cinebench R20 tells the same story. The multi-core score is 1576 for the i3-6320 versus 1547 for the i5-3475S, a 1.8% difference. The single-core result is 222 versus 218, again a 1.8% gap. The i3's higher base clock of 3.90 GHz is clearly giving it an edge in both single-threaded and multi-threaded rendering tasks, despite having only two physical cores.

Cinebench R23 repeats the pattern. The i3-6320 leads multi-core with 3753 against 3685, a 1.8% advantage. The single-core test shows 529 versus 520, a 1.7% lead. This consistency across all three Cinebench versions suggests the performance relationship is stable and predictable. The i5-3475S's 4-core advantage and larger 6 MB L3 cache are not enough to overcome the i3-6320's clock speed and architectural efficiency.

There are no tests where the i5-3475S wins. The head-to-head table shows winsA as 0 and winsB as 6. This is a clean sweep for the i3-6320, but the average benchmark scores tell a nuanced story: the i5-3475S averages 1091 while the i3-6320 averages 1085. The i5 actually has a slightly higher average score overall, driven by its Geekbench results of 1731 multi-core and 607 single-core, which are not part of the head-to-head comparison.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications. The core count is the most obvious: the i5-3475S has 4 cores, while the i3-6320 has 2 cores. Both have 4 threads, so the total thread count is identical, but the physical core arrangement is different.

Clock speeds diverge significantly. The i5-3475S has a base clock of 2.90 GHz and a boost clock of 3.60 GHz. The i3-6320 has a base clock of 3.90 GHz and no listed boost clock, meaning it runs at a fixed frequency. This 1.00 GHz base clock advantage for the i3-6320 is the primary driver of its benchmark wins.

The TDP differs, with the i5-3475S rated at 65 watts and the i3-6320 at 51 watts. This makes the i3 more power-efficient, a direct benefit of the newer 14 nm process versus the older 22 nm node. The socket is also different: the i5 uses Socket 1155, and the i3 uses Socket 1151, meaning they are not interchangeable in a motherboard.

Memory support is another clear split. The i5-3475S supports DDR3, while the i3-6320 supports DDR4 with a rated bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The i3-6320 also has a smaller die size (150 mm² versus 160 mm²) and less L3 cache (4 MB versus 6 MB). The integrated graphics differ, with the i5 featuring Intel HD 4000 and the i3 featuring Intel HD 530.

Both processors have 64 KB of L1 per core and 256 KB of L2 per core, and both use dual-channel memory. Neither supports ECC memory, neither has an unlocked multiplier, and both offer PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes. The release dates are far apart: the i5-3475S launched in May 2012, while the i3-6320 launched in August 2015. The i3-6320's production status is listed as Active, while the i5-3475S has no production status listed.

Where Each One Wins

The data shows a clean sweep for the i3-6320 in the head-to-head benchmarks, but the i5-3475S has its own advantages that make it a viable pick depending on the situation.

The i3-6320 wins in every rendering workload tested, from Cinebench R15 to R23, in both single-core and multi-core. Its higher base clock of 3.90 GHz gives it a consistent edge in tasks that respond to raw frequency. It also has a lower TDP of 51 watts, making it a better choice for compact or power-sensitive builds. The newer Skylake architecture and DDR4 memory support mean it is a more modern platform with better upgrade potential. The i3-6320 is also the only one of the two with an Active production status, suggesting it may be easier to source new.

The i5-3475S, despite losing all head-to-head tests, has strengths that the benchmark table does not fully capture. It has a higher average benchmark score of 1091 versus 1085 for the i3-6320, driven by its Geekbench multi-core score of 1731 and single-core score of 607. It has 4 physical cores, which can be beneficial in workloads that scale with core count rather than clock speed, even if the Cinebench results do not show a win. The larger 6 MB L3 cache, versus 4 MB on the i3, could help in applications that repeatedly access the same data. The i5 also supports DDR3, which may be a lower-cost or already-available option for builders with existing memory.

For single-threaded tasks like older games or lightly threaded applications, the i3-6320's clock speed advantage makes it the stronger candidate. For multi-threaded productivity that is not well-optimized for Hyper-Threading, the i5-3475S's physical cores may provide more consistent performance, even if the benchmarks do not reflect a win in the tested Cinebench workloads.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-6320 wins every head-to-head test, but by margins so small that they are unlikely to be noticeable in daily use. The i3-6320 is the better choice for users who want the newer platform, DDR4 memory support, lower power consumption, and slightly higher performance in rendering workloads. Its 51 watt TDP and Active production status make it a more practical option for a new build today.

The Intel Core i5-3475S is not a bad processor, but it is an older design. It loses all six head-to-head benchmarks, with deltas ranging from 1.7% to 1.9%. Its 4 physical cores and larger 6 MB L3 cache are theoretically appealing, but in the tested Cinebench workloads, they do not translate into a win. The i5's higher average benchmark score of 1091 versus 1085 is notable, but it comes from Geekbench tests that are not part of the direct comparison.

For a builder choosing between these two, the i3-6320 is the safer recommendation based on pure performance. It wins every test, uses less power, and supports a more modern memory standard. The i5-3475S is only preferable if you already have a Socket 1155 motherboard and DDR3 memory, or if you specifically need the extra physical cores for a workload that the benchmarks do not cover. In a fresh build, the i3-6320 is the clear winner.