Intel Core i3-N300 vs Intel Core i5-3330S Comparison

The Intel Core i5-3330S and Intel Core i3-N300 represent two very different eras of Intel design, and their benchmark results reflect that divide clearly. The i5-3330S is a 2012 desktop part built on the Ivy Bridge architecture, while the i3-N300 is a 2023 mobile processor using the newer Gracemont architecture. The data shows that while the older i5 holds a surprising lead in one specific multi-threaded test, the i3-N300 dominates the majority of benchmarks, particularly in single-core performance and newer Cinebench workloads. This comparison is less about raw speed and more about understanding where each chip’s architectural strengths lie.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-N300 wins decisively in most benchmark scenarios, taking 4 out of 5 head-to-head tests. Its biggest victories come in Cinebench R20, where it more than doubles the i5-3330S in both multi-core and single-core scores. The i3-N300 also wins in Cinebench R15 multi-core and Cinebench R23 single-core. This makes it the clear choice for modern applications that leverage newer instruction sets and higher clock speeds.

The Intel Core i5-3330S has one notable win: Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 3326 against the i3-N300’s 2546, a 30.6% advantage. This is an interesting anomaly, as the i3-N300 wins the older R20 multi-core test by a wide margin. The i5-3330S also has a higher average benchmark score (1128) compared to its rival (1135), though the difference is negligible. For legacy software or workloads that scale well with the i5’s four full cores, it can still hold its own, but the overall trend heavily favors the newer chip.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on fundamentally different architectures. The i5-3330S uses Ivy Bridge, a 22 nm process from Intel, with a die size of 133 mm². It features 4 cores and 4 threads, with a base clock of 2.70 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz. Its cache layout includes 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 6 MB of shared L3 cache. This is a traditional desktop design for the Intel Socket 1155 platform.

The i3-N300, in contrast, uses the Gracemont architecture on a 10 nm process. It has 8 cores and 8 threads, with a base clock listed at 100.00 GHz (likely a reporting artifact) and a boost clock of 3.70 GHz. Its cache structure is different: 96 KB L1 per core, 2 MB L2 per module, and 6 MB of shared L3. It is a mobile part on the Intel BGA 1264 socket. The i3-N300 also supports DDR4 and DDR5 memory in a single-channel configuration, with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, whereas the i5-3330S uses dual-channel DDR3. The i3-N300 features UHD Graphics 770, while the i5-3330S has Intel HD 2500. Both are locked multipliers, but the i3-N300 has a much lower TDP of 7W compared to the i5’s 77W.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data reveals a clear pattern of the i3-N300’s superiority in most tests, but with one significant reversal. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-N300 scores 416 against the i5-3330S’s 335, a 19.5% difference in favor of the newer chip. This shows that even in an older benchmark, the 8-core Gracemont design outperforms the 4-core Ivy Bridge.

The gap widens dramatically in Cinebench R20. In multi-core, the i3-N300 scores 2849 versus 1396 for the i5-3330S, a massive 51% advantage. The single-core test is even more lopsided: the i3-N300 scores 401 while the i5-3330S manages only 196, a 51.1% difference. This indicates that the i3-N300’s per-core performance is vastly superior, likely due to its higher boost clock and newer architecture.

However, the Cinebench R23 results tell a different story. In multi-core, the i5-3330S wins with 3326 points against the i3-N300’s 2546, giving the older chip a 30.6% lead. This is a surprising result that may be due to thermal or power management differences under sustained load in that specific benchmark. In single-core R23, the i3-N300 wins again, scoring 513 to the i5’s 469, an 8.6% margin. Overall, the i3-N300’s wins are more frequent and often larger, but the i5-3330S proves it can still win in a long-duration multi-threaded workload.

Specification Differences

The key specification differences between these two CPUs are stark. The i5-3330S has 4 cores and 4 threads, while the i3-N300 has 8 cores and 8 threads. Clock speeds differ significantly: the i5-3330S runs at 2.70 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost, whereas the i3-N300 boosts to 3.70 GHz. The process node is a major differentiator: 22 nm for the i5-3330S versus 10 nm for the i3-N300.

Memory support is another key divergence. The i5-3330S uses dual-channel DDR3, while the i3-N300 supports single-channel DDR4 and DDR5 with a specified bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. The i3-N300 also has a higher TDP efficiency at 7W compared to the i5’s 77W. The integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 2500 on the i5-3330S versus UHD Graphics 770 on the i3-N300. The PCIe lanes are also different, with the i5-3330S offering Gen 3 with 16 lanes, while the i3-N300 provides Gen 3 with 9 lanes. The release dates are nearly a decade apart, with the i5-3330S launching in 2012 and the i3-N300 in 2023. The i3-N300 has a launch MSRP of $309.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU has more cores and threads?

A: The Intel Core i3-N300 has 8 cores and 8 threads, while the Intel Core i5-3330S has 4 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How does the single-core performance compare?

A: The i3-N300 wins in both Cinebench R20 single-core (401 vs 196, a 51.1% difference) and Cinebench R23 single-core (513 vs 469, an 8.6% difference).

Q: Is the older i5-3330S better in any benchmark?

A: Yes, the i5-3330S wins in Cinebench R23 multi-core with a score of 3326, which is 30.6% higher than the i3-N300’s 2546.

Q: What are the memory support differences?

A: The i5-3330S supports dual-channel DDR3, while the i3-N300 supports single-channel DDR4 and DDR5 with a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Which processor has a lower TDP?

A: The Intel Core i3-N300 has a TDP of 7W, compared to the Intel Core i5-3330S’s 77W.

Q: How do their average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i3-N300 has an average benchmark score of 1135, slightly higher than the i5-3330S’s 1128. Both CPUs sit at the 32nd percentile of all CPUs.

The Verdict

From the data, the Intel Core i3-N300 is the more capable processor for the vast majority of tasks. Its wins in Cinebench R20 multi-core (2849 vs 1396) and single-core (401 vs 196) are decisive, showing a clear generational leap in performance. The 8-core, 8-thread configuration with a 3.70 GHz boost clock makes it the better choice for modern productivity software, web browsing, and light content creation. Its 7W TDP also makes it far more efficient for mobile or low-power builds.

The Intel Core i5-3330S should only be considered by users with specific legacy workloads that favor its architecture. Its win in Cinebench R23 multi-core (3326 vs 2546) suggests it can sustain high performance in certain long-duration tasks, but this is an isolated result against a pattern of losses. The i5-3330S also uses dual-channel DDR3, which may be easier to source for older Socket 1155 motherboards, but its 77W TDP and slower clocks make it a less attractive option for new builds. For anyone building or upgrading today, the i3-N300 offers better performance and efficiency across the board, with the only caveat being its single-channel memory interface, which may limit some bandwidth-sensitive applications. Ultimately, the i3-N300 is the recommended pick for general use, while the i5-3330S is a niche choice for those with specific compatibility needs.