Intel Core i3-8145U vs Intel Core i7-950 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Core i3-8145U wins every single head-to-head comparison recorded in the database. Out of five benchmark tests, the i3-8145U takes all five, with no victories for the Intel Core i7-950. This is not a marginal victory; the margins are remarkably uniform across all tests, hovering near 15 percent.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-8145U scores 322 against the i7-950's 280, a 15 percent advantage. The single-core test for R15 was not recorded for the i7-950, but the R20 single-core test shows the i3-8145U at 189 versus 164 for the i7-950, a 15.2 percent lead. The R20 multi-core test shows a similar 15 percent gap, with scores of 1342 and 1167 respectively. Moving to Cinebench R23, the single-core results show the i3-8145U at 451 and the i7-950 at 392, a 15.1 percent difference. The R23 multi-core test completes the sweep: 3196 for the i3-8145U versus 2780 for the i7-950, again a 15 percent margin.

The consistency of these deltas is notable. Whether the workload is single-threaded or multi-threaded, the i3-8145U maintains roughly the same advantage. This suggests a fundamental per-clock efficiency advantage rather than a scaling benefit from additional cores. The i7-950 has more cores and threads, but the i3-8145U's newer architecture and higher boost clock overcome that deficit in every measured scenario. The data shows that the i3-8145U is not just faster in isolated tasks; it is systematically faster across the entire Cinebench suite.

Looking at average benchmark scores, the i7-950 actually edges out the i3-8145U slightly, with an average of 957 versus 941. This averages in additional tests not detailed in the head-to-head list. However, the i3-8145U's percentile ranking is 25 versus 26 for the i7-950, meaning the older desktop chip sits marginally higher among all CPUs in the database. The average benchmark score for the i3-8145U places it in close company with the Intel Core i7-2715QE, which scores 942 with a delta of -0.1 percent, and the AMD Athlon X4 860K at 943 with a delta of -0.2 percent. The i7-950's average of 957 is matched exactly by the AMD Opteron 4386, and it sits just ahead of the AMD Athlon X4 870K and Intel Xeon W3550, both at 956.

These rival comparisons show that both CPUs are firmly in the mid-range of the database's performance distribution. The i3-8145U is effectively on par with the i7-2715QE and Athlon X4 860K, while the i7-950 matches the Opteron 4386. The head-to-head results, however, show that when these two specific processors are compared directly, the newer mobile chip has a decisive edge.

FAQ

Q: Which processor wins the majority of benchmark tests?

A: The Intel Core i3-8145U wins all five recorded head-to-head benchmark tests against the Intel Core i7-950. The wins include Cinebench R15 multi-core, R20 multi-core, R20 single-core, R23 multi-core, and R23 single-core.

Q: What is the largest performance gap between the two in any single test?

A: The largest recorded delta is 15.2 percent, achieved in the Cinebench R20 single-core test. The i3-8145U scores 189 while the i7-950 scores 164.

Q: How do the two processors compare in multi-core workloads?

A: The i3-8145U leads by 15 percent in all three multi-core tests. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, it scores 322 versus 280. In R20 multi-core, it scores 1342 versus 1167. In R23 multi-core, it scores 3196 versus 2780.

Q: Does the i7-950 have any advantage in average benchmark score?

A: Yes. The i7-950 has a slightly higher average benchmark score of 957 compared to 941 for the i3-8145U. This average incorporates a broader set of tests than the five head-to-head comparisons.

Q: Which processor has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The i7-950 ranks at the 26th percentile, while the i3-8145U ranks at the 25th percentile. This indicates the i7-950 sits marginally higher in the overall performance distribution.

Q: What are the closest rivals for each processor based on average score?

A: For the i3-8145U, the closest rivals are the Intel Core i7-2715QE (942, -0.1 percent), AMD Athlon X4 860K (943, -0.2 percent), Intel Core i5-4330M (938, 0.3 percent), and AMD A8-7670K (944, -0.4 percent). For the i7-950, the closest rivals are the AMD Opteron 4386 (957, 0 percent), AMD Athlon X4 870K (956, 0.1 percent), AMD Ryzen Embedded R1600 (958, -0.1 percent), and Intel Xeon W3550 (956, 0.1 percent).

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from vastly different eras of Intel's design philosophy. The Intel Core i3-8145U is built on Whiskey Lake architecture, specifically the Whiskey Lake-U codename, fabricated on a 10 nm process node. The Intel Core i7-950 uses the Nehalem architecture with the Bloomfield codename, manufactured on a 45 nm process. This process node difference is significant: the 10 nm node is dramatically smaller than the 45 nm node, allowing for higher transistor density and improved power efficiency per unit of performance.

The i3-8145U is a dual-core processor with four threads, while the i7-950 is a quad-core processor with eight threads. Despite having half the cores and threads, the i3-8145U still outperforms the i7-950 in all recorded benchmarks. This reflects the architectural improvements between Nehalem and Whiskey Lake. The i7-950 does have a substantial cache advantage, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache compared to 4 MB on the i3-8145U. Both processors have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core.

The i7-950 also carries a larger physical footprint, with a die size of 263 mm² and 731 million transistors. The i3-8145U does not have recorded die size or transistor counts in the database. The i7-950's larger die and older process node contribute significantly to its 130 W TDP, whereas the i3-8145U has a 15 W TDP. This is a 115 W difference, reflecting the mobile focus of the i3-8145U versus the desktop-oriented i7-950.

Memory support differs as well. The i3-8145U supports DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The i7-950 supports DDR3 memory with a triple-channel bus, and its memory bandwidth is not recorded in the database. Neither processor supports ECC memory. The i3-8145U has integrated graphics in the form of UHD Graphics 620, while the i7-950 has no integrated graphics at all, requiring a discrete GPU for any display output.

PCIe support also varies. The i3-8145U provides PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes available from the CPU, while the i7-950 provides PCIe Gen 2 without a recorded lane count. The i3-8145U uses an Intel BGA 1528 socket, indicating a soldered mobile design, while the i7-950 uses the Intel Socket 1366, a traditional desktop socket. Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier.

Specification Differences

The two chips diverge on nearly every core specification in the database. The i3-8145U has 2 cores and 4 threads, while the i7-950 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clock speeds differ substantially: the i3-8145U runs at 2.10 GHz, while the i7-950 runs at 3.07 GHz. Boost clocks tell a different story, with the i3-8145U boosting to 3.90 GHz versus 3.33 GHz for the i7-950. This higher boost clock on the i3-8145U is a key factor in its single-core performance wins.

Thermal design power is a major differentiator. The i3-8145U has a TDP of just 15 W, while the i7-950 has a TDP of 130 W. This 115 W gap reflects the fundamental difference in their intended deployment scenarios: ultraportable laptops versus desktop towers. The i3-8145U uses the Intel BGA 1528 socket, while the i7-950 uses Intel Socket 1366. The process nodes differ as well, with the i3-8145U on 10 nm and the i7-950 on 45 nm.

Cache configurations differ in total L3 capacity, with the i3-8145U offering 4 MB shared and the i7-950 offering 8 MB shared. L1 and L2 cache are identical on a per-core basis. Memory support differs in both type and channel configuration: the i3-8145U uses DDR4 with dual-channel support, while the i7-950 uses DDR3 with triple-channel support. The i3-8145U has a recorded memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the i7-950 has no recorded value.

The i3-8145U includes integrated graphics with UHD Graphics 620, while the i7-950 has none. PCIe support differs, with the i3-8145U providing Gen 3 with 16 lanes and the i7-950 providing Gen 2 without a lane count. The market segments are distinct, with the i3-8145U classified as Mobile and the i7-950 as Desktop. The i3-8145U has a recorded launch MSRP of $281, while the i7-950 has no launch MSRP in the database. Release dates differ by roughly nine years, with the i3-8145U released in 2018 and the i7-950 released in 2009. Both are marked as end-of-life in production status.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-8145U is the clear winner in every benchmark category recorded. Its 15 percent lead across multi-core tests in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 makes it the stronger choice for rendering and CPU-intensive workloads, despite having fewer physical cores. The i3-8145U's single-core advantages, ranging from 15.1 to 15.2 percent, indicate superior performance in lightly threaded applications such as everyday desktop tasks, web browsing, and office productivity. Its integrated UHD Graphics 620 means it can handle basic display output without a discrete GPU, a significant advantage for compact and mobile systems. The 15 W TDP makes it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where power efficiency and thermal management are critical. The 10 nm process node and DDR4 memory support position it as the more modern platform.

The Intel Core i7-950, despite losing all head-to-head benchmarks, has its own strengths in the database. Its higher average benchmark score of 957 versus 941 suggests it performs better across a wider range of tests beyond the Cinebench suite. The 26th percentile ranking versus 25th indicates it sits slightly higher in the overall CPU distribution. The i7-950's 8 MB of L3 cache is double that of the i3-8145U, which could benefit workloads with large working sets that fit in cache. Its triple-channel DDR3 memory bus offers broader memory bandwidth potential in theory, though no bandwidth figure is recorded. The 4-core, 8-thread configuration provides more parallel processing headroom for tasks that scale well with thread count, even if the older architecture cannot match the per-clock efficiency of the newer chip. The 130 W TDP, while high, is typical for a desktop part from its era and allows for sustained operation in a desktop chassis with adequate cooling. The Socket 1366 platform was designed for high-end desktop systems, and the i7-950's lack of integrated graphics means it pairs with dedicated GPUs, which could be preferable for gaming or workstation builds where the i3-8145U's integrated solution would be insufficient.

The data ultimately shows a generational shift. The i3-8145U wins on raw performance in every direct comparison, but the i7-950 retains a slight edge in average score and percentile ranking, suggesting the older chip still has merit in specific scenarios outside the tested Cinebench suite. For new system builders, the i3-8145U offers the better combination of performance, efficiency, and modern features. For those working with existing Socket 1366 platforms, the i7-950 remains a viable option, particularly in multi-threaded workloads that can utilize its eight threads.