Intel Core i3-7320 vs Intel Core i3-8145UE Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data paints a remarkably one-sided picture. The Intel Core i3-7320 wins all five recorded head-to-head comparisons, with no single test going to the Core i3-8145UE. That said, the two chips occupy entirely different market segments, and the shape of their performance profiles tells a more nuanced story than a simple win count.

The i3-7320 is a desktop part with a 4.10 GHz base clock and a 51 W TDP. Its strength lies in sustained throughput where the higher clock speed can be maintained indefinitely. The i3-8145UE is a mobile part, built for a 15 W TDP with a 2.20 GHz base clock and a 3.90 GHz boost. It is not designed to win raw benchmark races; it is designed to deliver adequate performance within a much tighter power envelope.

In multi-core workloads, the i3-7320 leads by roughly 21% across all three Cinebench versions. In single-core tests, the margin is nearly identical, between 20.9% and 21.2%. This consistency is notable: the desktop chip does not merely pull ahead in one type of workload, it maintains the same proportional advantage everywhere. The i3-8145UE, meanwhile, shows that its boost clock allows it to approach the desktop part in relative terms, but it never closes the gap.

The recorded data suggests the i3-8145UE wins in the context that matters most for its segment: power efficiency and mobility. While no direct efficiency metric appears in the database, the 15 W TDP compared to 51 W implies a dramatically lower thermal and electrical footprint. For a thin-and-light laptop, that trade-off is the entire point. The i3-7320 wins every benchmark, but it cannot be dropped into a laptop chassis, and the i3-8145UE cannot be expected to match a desktop-class clock speed.

Architecture Differences

Both processors use two cores and four threads, with identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel configuration, with the same 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth. Both lack ECC support and both have locked multipliers.

The differences start with the process node. The i3-7320 is built on Intel's 14 nm process under the Kaby Lake architecture. The i3-8145UE uses Whiskey Lake, listed in the database as a 10 nm part. This node difference is central to the power consumption gap: the newer process node allows the mobile chip to operate at a 15 W TDP while the older desktop chip draws 51 W.

Clock behavior separates the two further. The i3-7320 runs at a fixed 4.10 GHz with no boost clock listed. The i3-8145UE runs at 2.20 GHz base and boosts to 3.90 GHz. This means the mobile chip can reach near-desktop frequencies in short bursts, but its sustained performance is limited by its thermal and power budget. The desktop chip's advantage is that it can hold its full frequency indefinitely.

The socket and platform differ completely. The i3-7320 uses Intel Socket 1151, the desktop platform, while the i3-8145UE is soldered to Intel BGA 1528, a mobile platform. The integrated graphics also differ: the i3-7320 carries Intel HD 630, while the i3-8145UE ships with UHD Graphics 620. The PCIe implementation is identical on paper, Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The release dates sit roughly two years apart, with the i3-7320 arriving in early 2017 and the i3-8145UE in late 2018. Both parts remain in active production according to the database. The part numbers are SR358 for the desktop chip and SRFDT for the mobile chip.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results show a uniform pattern. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-7320 scores 408 against 337 for the i3-8145UE, a 21.1% advantage. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 1703 and 1408, a 21% lead. Single-core R20 shows 240 versus 198, a 21.2% margin. Cinebench R23 multi-core gives 4057 versus 3354, again 21%, and single-core R23 gives 572 versus 473, a 20.9% edge.

The consistency of these deltas is striking. Across five different workloads spanning multiple Cinebench versions, the advantage never deviates outside a 20.9% to 21.2% band. This suggests the difference is almost entirely clock-driven. The i3-7320's 4.10 GHz fixed clock versus the i3-8145UE's 2.20 GHz base clock explains the magnitude; the mobile chip's boost clock helps it in short bursts, but the sustained tests in Cinebench reflect the lower sustained frequency.

The i3-8145UE's average benchmark score of 1154 places it just below the i3-7320's 1173. Both parts sit at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the i3-7320 include the Core i7-3635QM at 1170 (0.3% behind), the Core i7-2960XM at 1169 (0.4% behind), and the Core i5-3550 at 1178 (0.4% ahead). The i3-8145UE's nearest rivals include the AMD Opteron 4334 at 1155 (0.1% ahead), the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312 at 1156 (0.2% ahead), and the Core i5-4430 at 1149 (0.4% behind).

The interesting detail is that both chips land in the same percentile despite the 21% gap between them. The i3-8145UE's rivals are older desktop parts and embedded processors, while the i3-7320 sits among mid-range desktop chips from earlier generations. The data indicates that the mobile chip, despite its lower raw scores, competes in a similar overall performance class when measured against the broader CPU landscape.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-7320 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 408 versus 337 in R15, 1703 versus 1408 in R20, and 4057 versus 3354 in R23, a consistent 21% advantage.

Q: Does the i3-8145UE win any benchmark?

A: No. The database records five head-to-head tests, and the i3-7320 wins all five. The i3-8145UE has no recorded wins in any Cinebench test.

Q: How much power does each processor use?

A: The i3-7320 has a 51 W TDP, while the i3-8145UE has a 15 W TDP. The mobile chip uses less than a third of the power budget of the desktop part.

Q: Are the cache sizes the same?

A: Yes. Both have 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. Memory support is also identical: dual-channel DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth.

Q: What clock speeds do the two chips run at?

A: The i3-7320 runs at a fixed 4.10 GHz with no boost clock. The i3-8145UE has a 2.20 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.90 GHz.

Q: How do these chips compare to their nearest rivals?

A: The i3-7320's average score of 1173 is 0.3% ahead of the Core i7-3635QM and 0.4% behind the Core i5-3550. The i3-8145UE's average of 1154 is 0.1% behind the AMD Opteron 4334 and 0.2% behind the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear split based on use case, not raw performance. For anyone building or upgrading a desktop system where power draw is not a constraint, the i3-7320 is the obvious choice. It delivers a 21% advantage across every recorded workload, and its fixed 4.10 GHz clock means that advantage holds under sustained load. The 51 W TDP is irrelevant in a desktop chassis with adequate cooling.

For a mobile system, the i3-8145UE is the only viable option between these two. It cannot be installed in a laptop socket, but more importantly, its 15 W TDP is what makes thin-and-light designs possible. The 2.20 GHz base clock with 3.90 GHz boost provides burst performance that approaches the desktop chip in short workloads, though sustained tasks will settle closer to the base clock.

The average benchmark scores tell a slightly different story. The i3-7320 sits at 1173, the i3-8145UE at 1154, a gap of only 1.6% in aggregate. This is because the mobile chip's boost clock allows it to perform closer to the desktop part in mixed or short workloads, even though the sustained Cinebench tests show a much larger gap. Both sit at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning neither is a high-end part in the broader market.

The practical recommendation from the data: desktop users who need every bit of throughput should take the i3-7320. Mobile users who need a balanced processor for everyday tasks should consider the i3-8145UE, accepting that it will trail the desktop part by roughly one-fifth in sustained multi-core and single-core work. The i3-8145UE's 10 nm process node and 15 W TDP represent the trade-off for mobility, and the benchmark results quantify exactly what that trade-off costs.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-7320 | Intel Core i3-8145UE |

|---|---|---|

| Base clock | 4.10 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | None | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 51 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1151 | Intel BGA 1528 |

| Architecture | Kaby Lake | Whiskey Lake |

| Codename | Kaby Lake | Whiskey Lake-U |

| Generation | Core i3 (Kaby Lake) | Core i3 (Whiskey Lake) |

| Process node | 14 nm | 10 nm |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 630 | UHD Graphics 620 |

| Market segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Release date | 2017-01-02 | 2018-09-30 |

| Part number | SR358 | SRFDT |

The two chips share identical core and thread counts, L1 and L2 cache sizes, 4 MB shared L3, dual-channel DDR4 support, 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, and locked multipliers. The remaining fields in the database, including transistors and die size, are not recorded for either part.