Intel Core i3-8145UE vs Intel Core i5-3450 Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data presents a clear and consistent picture: the Intel Core i5-3450 wins every single head-to-head comparison, and it does so by a remarkably uniform margin. Across all five shared Cinebench tests, the i5-3450 leads by approximately 14.5% to 14.8%. This consistency is striking—it suggests the performance gap is structural rather than workload-dependent.

Starting with multi-core performance, the i5-3450 scores 387 in Cinebench R15 multi-core versus 337 for the i3-8145UE, a 14.8% advantage. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i5-3450 posts 1613 against 1408, a 14.6% lead. In the more demanding Cinebench R23 multi-core test, the i5-3450 reaches 3842 while the i3-8145UE manages 3354, again a 14.5% margin.

Single-core results tell the same story. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i5-3450 scores 227 versus 198 for the i3-8145UE, a 14.6% advantage. The Cinebench R23 single-core test shows the i5-3450 at 542 and the i3-8145UE at 473, another 14.6% gap. What is particularly interesting is that the i3-8145UE has a higher boost clock (3.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz), yet it still loses single-core tests decisively. This implies the older Ivy Bridge architecture's per-clock efficiency is substantially superior, or that the mobile chip cannot sustain its boost frequency under load.

The i5-3450 also has additional benchmark data that the i3-8145UE lacks. In Geekbench, the i5-3450 scores 1985 multi-core and 681 single-core. The i3-8145UE has no Geekbench results in the data pack, so direct comparison is impossible there. However, the average benchmark score tells a similar story: the i5-3450 averages 1166 across all its tests, while the i3-8145UE averages 1154. That is a narrow 1% overall difference, which seems to contradict the Cinebench margins. The discrepancy likely arises because the Geekbench results pull the i5-3450's average down relative to its Cinebench performance, while the i3-8145UE's average is computed from a different test mix.

The nearest rivals for each chip are also informative. The i5-3450 sits within 0.3% of the AMD Opteron 6220, Intel Core i5-3570S, Intel Core i7-2960XM, and Intel Core i7-3635QM. The i3-8145UE sits within 0.6% of the AMD Opteron 4334, AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312, Intel Core i5-4430, and Intel Core i7-3612QE. Both chips occupy the same 33rd percentile of all CPUs, meaning they are statistically equivalent in overall standing despite the i5-3450's consistent Cinebench wins.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from fundamentally different eras of Intel design. The i5-3450 uses the Ivy Bridge architecture, built on a 22 nm process node, while the i3-8145UE uses Whiskey Lake, built on a 10 nm node. This process difference is significant—the newer 10 nm node should theoretically offer better power efficiency and higher transistor density, yet the i5-3450 still wins every benchmark.

The core configuration differs substantially. The i5-3450 has 4 physical cores and 4 threads, while the i3-8145UE has only 2 physical cores but 4 threads thanks to Hyper-Threading. Despite the thread count being equal, the i5-3450's additional physical cores give it a structural advantage in multi-threaded workloads. The i5-3450 also has a larger L3 cache at 6 MB shared, versus 4 MB shared on the i3-8145UE. Both share the same L1 cache at 64 KB per core and L2 cache at 256 KB per core.

Clock speeds tell a nuanced story. The i5-3450 has a higher base clock at 3.10 GHz versus 2.20 GHz, but the i3-8145UE has a higher boost clock at 3.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz. The i5-3450's 14.6% single-core win despite the lower boost clock strongly suggests that the older architecture delivers more instructions per clock, or that the mobile chip's thermal constraints prevent sustained boost operation.

Memory support also diverges. The i5-3450 uses DDR3 with dual-channel support and a memory bandwidth of 25.6 GB/s. The i3-8145UE uses DDR4, also dual-channel, with a higher memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. Despite the i3-8145UE's superior memory bandwidth, it cannot translate that into a benchmark win. The i5-3450 also has a much larger die at 160 mm² with 1,400 million transistors, while the i3-8145UE's die size and transistor count are not listed in the data.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-3450 includes Intel HD 2500, while the i3-8145UE includes UHD Graphics 620. The newer UHD solution is generally more capable, but the data pack does not include graphics benchmarks, so this cannot be quantified. The socket and form factor also differ completely: the i5-3450 uses Intel Socket 1155 for desktop, while the i3-8145UE uses Intel BGA 1528 for mobile. The i5-3450's TDP is 77 watts, while the i3-8145UE draws only 15 watts—a massive power difference that explains the mobile chip's lower sustained performance.

FAQ

Q: Why does the older i5-3450 beat the newer i3-8145UE in every benchmark?

A: The i5-3450 has 4 physical cores versus 2 physical cores on the i3-8145UE, and it also has a larger 6 MB L3 cache versus 4 MB. Despite the i3-8145UE's higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz, the i5-3450's additional cores and cache appear to outweigh clock speed advantages in both single- and multi-threaded tests.

Q: Is the i3-8145UE's 15-watt TDP a meaningful advantage?

A: Yes, in terms of power efficiency. The i5-3450 has a 77-watt TDP, which is over five times higher. The i3-8145UE is designed for mobile systems where power draw is critical. However, this efficiency comes at the cost of benchmark performance—the i5-3450 wins every shared test by roughly 14.5%.

Q: How close are these two chips in overall performance?

A: The average benchmark scores are very close: the i5-3450 averages 1166 and the i3-8145UE averages 1154, a difference of about 1%. Both sit at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs. However, in the specific Cinebench tests they share, the i5-3450 consistently leads by 14.5% to 14.8%.

Q: Does the i3-8145UE's DDR4 memory support give it any advantage?

A: The i3-8145UE supports DDR4 with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, versus DDR3 at 25.6 GB/s for the i5-3450. Despite this higher memory bandwidth, the i3-8145UE still loses all Cinebench tests, suggesting memory bandwidth is not the limiting factor in these workloads.

Q: What does the i3-8145UE's lack of Geekbench results mean?

A: The data pack does not include Geekbench scores for the i3-8145UE, so direct comparison in that test is impossible. The i5-3450 scores 1985 multi-core and 681 single-core in Geekbench, but without comparable data for the i3-8145UE, these numbers only provide context for the i5-3450's overall average.

Q: Which chip has better production status for long-term availability?

A: The i5-3450 is listed as end-of-life, while the i3-8145UE is active. This means the i3-8145UE is still in production, while the i5-3450 has been discontinued. The i5-3450 was released on 2012-04-28, while the i3-8145UE was released on 2018-09-30.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-3450 | Intel Core i3-8145UE |

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

| Cores | 4 | 2 |

| Threads | 4 | 4 |

| Base Clock | 3.10 GHz | 2.20 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | 3.90 GHz |

| TDP | 77 W | 15 W |

| Socket | Intel Socket 1155 | Intel BGA 1528 |

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Whiskey Lake |

| Process Node | 22 nm | 10 nm |

| Transistors | 1,400 million | Not listed |

| Die Size | 160 mm² | Not listed |

| L3 Cache | 6 MB (shared) | 4 MB (shared) |

| Memory Support | DDR3 | DDR4 |

| Memory Bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| Integrated Graphics | Intel HD 2500 | UHD Graphics 620 |

| Market Segment | Desktop | Mobile |

| Production Status | End-of-life | Active |

| Release Date | 2012-04-28 | 2018-09-30 |

| Launch MSRP | $174 | Not listed |

| Part Number | SR0PF | SRFDT |

The two chips share several characteristics: both are Intel-manufactured, have dual-channel memory buses, support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, lack ECC memory support, and have locked multipliers. They also share identical L1 cache (64 KB per core) and L2 cache (256 KB per core) configurations.

Where Each One Wins

The i5-3450 wins in every measurable performance category from the data. It takes all five head-to-head Cinebench tests: R15 multi-core (387 vs 337), R20 multi-core (1613 vs 1408), R20 single-core (227 vs 198), R23 multi-core (3842 vs 3354), and R23 single-core (542 vs 473). Its 4 physical cores provide a foundation for multi-threaded workloads that the 2-core i3-8145UE cannot match, even with Hyper-Threading.

The i5-3450 also wins on cache capacity, with 6 MB L3 versus 4 MB on the i3-8145UE. This larger cache likely contributes to its single-core wins, as more data can be stored closer to the cores. The i5-3450's higher base clock of 3.10 GHz versus 2.20 GHz also means it starts from a higher performance floor, even if the i3-8145UE can boost higher under ideal conditions.

The i3-8145UE wins on power efficiency and mobility. Its 15-watt TDP is dramatically lower than the i5-3450's 77 watts, making it suitable for thin-and-light laptops where the i5-3450's desktop power draw would be impractical. It also supports newer DDR4 memory with higher bandwidth (38.4 GB/s versus 25.6 GB/s), which could benefit memory-sensitive applications not represented in the benchmark data. The i3-8145UE is also still in active production, while the i5-3450 is end-of-life.

The i3-8145UE's higher boost clock of 3.90 GHz versus 3.50 GHz represents an untapped potential—if the workload is short enough to stay within thermal limits, the newer chip could close the gap in burst scenarios. However, the benchmark data does not support this hypothesis, as the i3-8145UE loses even the single-core tests.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i5-3450 outperforms the Intel Core i3-8145UE in every benchmark they share. The margin is remarkably consistent at roughly 14.5-14.8% across all Cinebench tests, whether single-core or multi-core. Users prioritizing raw performance should choose the i5-3450, particularly for multi-threaded workloads where its 4 physical cores provide a structural advantage over the i3-8145UE's 2 cores.

However, the i3-8145UE is not without merit. Its 15-watt TDP versus 77 watts makes it the clear choice for mobile and low-power applications. The i5-3450's desktop socket (Intel Socket 1155) and end-of-life status limit its utility in new builds, while the i3-8145UE's active production status and mobile form factor (Intel BGA 1528) make it suitable for current laptop designs. The i3-8145UE also supports newer DDR4 memory with higher bandwidth, which may benefit future workloads even if it does not help in current Cinebench tests.

The closest rivals for each chip reinforce their positioning. The i5-3450 sits alongside desktop and mobile quad-core processors like the Intel Core i7-2960XM and i7-3635QM, while the i3-8145UE competes with the AMD Ryzen Embedded R2312 and Intel Core i5-4430. Neither chip is exceptional—both sit at the 33rd percentile of all CPUs—but they are roughly equivalent in overall standing.

The verdict comes down to use case. For desktop users who need maximum processing power and have adequate cooling, the i5-3450 is the clear winner based on benchmark data. For mobile users who prioritize battery life and portability over raw performance, the i3-8145UE is the appropriate choice, accepting a consistent 14.5% performance penalty in exchange for dramatically lower power consumption. The data does not support any scenario where the i3-8145UE wins on performance alone.