Intel Core i3-7320 vs Intel Core i5-3330 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-7320 wins every recorded comparison. Across all five Cinebench tests, the i3-7320 takes the lead, leaving the i5-3330 with zero wins in the head-to-head results. The i3-7320's advantage is consistent, ranging from a 14% to 14.2% margin depending on the workload.

The i5-3330 does not win any benchmark in the database. Its strongest case is not a single test victory but a structural one: it offers four physical cores, which matters for workloads that scale with core count. However, the recorded data shows that even in multi-core tests, the i3-7320's higher clock speed and newer architecture overcome the core deficit. The i3-7320 scores 408 in Cinebench R15 multi-core against the i5-3330's 351, a 14% gap. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i3-7320 posts 4057 versus 3486, again a 14.1% lead.

Single-core performance is where the i3-7320 pulls away most decisively. Its 4.10 GHz base clock, with no boost clock listed, gives it a commanding edge in lightly threaded tasks. The i3-7320 scores 572 in Cinebench R23 single-core, while the i5-3330 manages 492, a 14% difference. The i3-7320 also leads in Cinebench R20 single-core with 240 against 206, a 14.2% margin.

The i5-3330's only theoretical advantage is its four physical cores versus the i3-7320's two. Yet the data shows that advantage does not translate into benchmark wins. The i3-7320's 4.10 GHz clock, combined with its newer Kaby Lake architecture, compensates fully for having fewer physical cores. The i3-7320 also has a lower TDP of 51 watts against the i5-3330's 77 watts, making it the more efficient choice in the recorded specifications.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different eras of Intel's design. The i5-3330 uses the Ivy Bridge architecture on a 22 nm process node, while the i3-7320 uses Kaby Lake on a 14 nm node. This process shrink is a major factor in the performance gap, as the newer node allows higher clock speeds at lower power consumption.

Core and thread counts differ significantly. The i5-3330 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i3-7320 has 2 cores and 4 threads. Both support four threads total, but the i5-3330 does so with four physical cores, while the i3-7320 relies on Hyper-Threading to reach four threads from two cores. The i3-7320's base clock of 4.10 GHz is substantially higher than the i5-3330's 3.00 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost. The i3-7320 has no boost clock listed, meaning its 4.10 GHz is its maximum operating frequency.

Cache configurations also differ. The i5-3330 has 6 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-7320 has 4 MB. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core. The i5-3330's larger L3 cache is a legacy of its quad-core design, but the i3-7320's smaller cache is paired with a much higher clock speed.

Memory support is another generational split. The i5-3330 supports DDR3 memory, while the i3-7320 supports DDR4. The i3-7320 has a listed memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the i5-3330 has no bandwidth figure recorded. Both use dual-channel memory buses. The i3-7320's DDR4 support gives it access to faster memory technology, though the i5-3330's DDR3 support is typical of its 2012 release.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-3330 includes Intel HD 2500, while the i3-7320 includes Intel HD 630. The i3-7320's newer graphics solution is part of its Kaby Lake package. Both processors use the same PCIe configuration: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The sockets are incompatible. The i5-3330 uses Intel Socket 1155, while the i3-7320 uses Intel Socket 1151. This means they cannot be swapped into the same motherboard. The i5-3330's die size is listed at 133 mm², while the i3-7320 has no die size recorded. The i5-3330 was released in September 2012, while the i3-7320 was released in January 2017. The i3-7320 is marked as Active in production status, while the i5-3330 has no production status listed.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-7320 wins all multi-core tests. It scores 408 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 351 for the i5-3330, 1703 in Cinebench R20 multi-core versus 1464, and 4057 in Cinebench R23 multi-core versus 3486. The margin is 14% in each case.

Q: Does the i5-3330's four physical cores give it an advantage?

A: The recorded data shows no benchmark advantage. Despite having 4 cores against the i3-7320's 2 cores, the i5-3330 loses every multi-core test. The i3-7320's higher clock speed and newer architecture overcome the core count difference.

Q: How do the two compare in single-core performance?

A: The i3-7320 leads by 14.2% in Cinebench R20 single-core (240 versus 206) and by 14% in Cinebench R23 single-core (572 versus 492). The i3-7320's 4.10 GHz base clock is the primary driver of this advantage.

Q: Can these processors be used in the same motherboard?

A: No. The i5-3330 uses Intel Socket 1155, while the i3-7320 uses Intel Socket 1151. They are physically incompatible.

Q: Which processor supports newer memory technology?

A: The i3-7320 supports DDR4 memory with a listed bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The i5-3330 supports DDR3 memory and has no bandwidth figure recorded.

Q: What is the power consumption difference?

A: The i3-7320 has a TDP of 51 watts, while the i5-3330 has a TDP of 77 watts. The i3-7320 delivers higher performance while drawing less power.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in nearly every major specification category. The i5-3330 has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i3-7320 has 2 cores and 4 threads. The i5-3330 has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, while the i3-7320 has a base clock of 4.10 GHz and no boost clock listed.

The TDP differs by 26 watts: 77 watts for the i5-3330, 51 watts for the i3-7320. The sockets are different, with the i5-3330 on Intel Socket 1155 and the i3-7320 on Intel Socket 1151. The architectures are generations apart: Ivy Bridge for the i5-3330, Kaby Lake for the i3-7320. The process nodes are 22 nm and 14 nm respectively.

Cache sizes differ in L3 only. Both have 64 KB L1 per core and 256 KB L2 per core, but the i5-3330 has 6 MB shared L3 while the i3-7320 has 4 MB shared L3. Memory support is DDR3 for the i5-3330 and DDR4 for the i3-7320. The i3-7320 has a listed memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the i5-3330 has none recorded.

The integrated graphics are different: Intel HD 2500 for the i5-3330, Intel HD 630 for the i3-7320. The release dates are September 2012 for the i5-3330 and January 2017 for the i3-7320. The i3-7320 is listed as Active in production, while the i5-3330 has no production status. The part numbers are SR0RQ for the i5-3330 and SR358 for the i3-7320. The i5-3330 has a die size of 133 mm², while the i3-7320 has none recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are one-sided. The i3-7320 wins all five recorded comparisons, with the i5-3330 taking zero wins. The margins are tightly clustered between 14% and 14.2%, showing a consistent performance gap across different Cinebench versions and workload types.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-7320 scores 408 against the i5-3330's 351, a 14% lead. This test is the oldest in the set, and the gap is already established. Moving to Cinebench R20 multi-core, the i3-7320 scores 1703 against 1464, again a 14% margin. The i3-7320's lead persists in Cinebench R23 multi-core with 4057 versus 3486, a 14.1% difference.

Single-core results show a similar pattern. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-7320 scores 240 against 206, a 14.2% lead. In Cinebench R23 single-core, the i3-7320 scores 572 against 492, a 14% margin. The consistency of these deltas, all within a 0.2 percentage point range, indicates a stable performance advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

The i5-3330's best relative showing is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where it trails by 14%. Its worst is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where it trails by 14.2%. The i3-7320's advantage is uniform across both single-threaded and multi-threaded tests, suggesting that its higher clock speed and newer architecture benefit all workload types equally.

The average benchmark scores reflect this gap. The i5-3330 has an average benchmark score of 1200, while the i3-7320 has 1173. The i5-3330's percentile ranking is 34, slightly above the i3-7320's 33. These aggregate metrics are close, but the head-to-head Cinebench results show a clear winner in direct comparison.

The Verdict

The data points to one conclusion: the Intel Core i3-7320 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. It wins all five head-to-head tests with margins between 14% and 14.2%. The i5-3330 does not win a single comparison in the database.

The i3-7320 is the choice for anyone prioritizing raw performance. Its 4.10 GHz clock speed, Kaby Lake architecture, and 14 nm process node deliver superior results in both single-core and multi-core workloads. It also consumes less power, with a 51 watt TDP against the i5-3330's 77 watts, and supports newer DDR4 memory.

The i5-3330's case rests on its four physical cores and larger 6 MB L3 cache. For workloads that specifically benefit from physical cores rather than threads, it may have an unmeasured advantage. However, the recorded Cinebench results show that the i3-7320's two cores with four threads outperform the i5-3330's four physical cores in every multi-core test. The i5-3330 also has a higher average benchmark score of 1200 against 1173, and a slightly better percentile ranking of 34 against 33, but these aggregate metrics do not translate into head-to-head wins.

The i3-7320 is the better processor for nearly all use cases. Its performance lead is consistent, its power draw is lower, and its platform supports newer memory technology. The i5-3330 remains a functional quad-core option, but the data shows it is outclassed by the newer dual-core i3-7320. The i3-7320 is the clear recommendation from the recorded benchmarks.