Intel Core i5-3210M vs Intel Core i5-3230M Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two mobile Ivy Bridge processors is unusually clear cut. The Intel Core i5-3230M takes five of the seven recorded head-to-head wins, while the Intel Core i5-3210M takes two. The division follows workload type almost perfectly. In Cinebench tests, which stress sustained multi-threaded rendering and single-core ray tracing, the i5-3230M leads across every version. In Geekbench tests, which mix integer, floating-point, and memory patterns, the i5-3210M takes both wins with substantial margins.

The i5-3230M wins all five Cinebench comparisons: R15 multicore (220 vs 210, a 4.5% lead), R20 multicore (917 vs 879, 4.1%), R20 single-core (129 vs 123, 4.7%), R23 multicore (2184 vs 2095, 4.1%), and R23 single-core (308 vs 295, 4.2%). The consistency of the margin across different Cinebench versions suggests a steady clock advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk. The i5-3210M counters in Geekbench with a 9.6% multicore win (1116 vs 1018) and a 16.2% single-core win (587 vs 505). That Geekbench single-core gap is the largest delta recorded in either direction.

The overall average benchmark scores are nearly identical: the i5-3210M averages 758, the i5-3230M averages 754. Both sit at the 20th percentile of all CPUs in the database. The nearest rivals for the i5-3210M include the Intel Core i3-5020U (757, 0.1% behind), Intel Xeon E5450 (756, 0.2% behind), Intel Core i5-4250U (756, 0.3% behind), and Intel Core i3-3240 (761, 0.3% ahead). For the i5-3230M, the nearest rivals are the Intel Xeon X5460 (754, 0% delta), Intel Core i5-4250U (756, 0.2% ahead), Intel Xeon E5450 (756, 0.3% ahead), and Intel Core i3-5020U (757, 0.4% ahead). In both cases the surrounding CPUs are packed within a 1% band, meaning neither chip separates itself from a cluster of similarly-performing parts.

The data shows that the i5-3230M is the stronger choice for rendering-style workloads that scale with sustained clocks, while the i5-3210M holds an unexpected advantage in Geekbench that exceeds the clock gap. The i5-3230M has a 2.60 GHz base and 3.20 GHz boost versus the i5-3210M's 2.50 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost. That 0.10 GHz difference across both base and boost explains the Cinebench results but does not explain the Geekbench reversal.

The Verdict

The i5-3230M is the safer pick for users running Cinebench-style render workloads. It wins every Cinebench test by 4.1% to 4.7%, a margin that holds across five separate versions of the benchmark. The i5-3210M, however, demonstrates superior Geekbench performance with a 9.6% multicore and 16.2% single-core advantage. The database shows no single processor dominates all workloads, so the choice depends entirely on which benchmark suite matches the user's typical applications.

The i5-3230M also edges ahead in total wins (5 vs 2), but the average benchmark scores tell a different story: 758 for the i5-3210M versus 754 for the i5-3230M. That 4-point gap is negligible, and both CPUs occupy the same 20th percentile. Neither chip pulls meaningfully ahead of its nearest rivals, which all sit within 0.4% of each other.

For users who prioritize multi-threaded rendering in Cinebench, the i5-3230M is the data-backed choice. For users who see better Geekbench scores as a proxy for general system responsiveness or application performance, the i5-3210M wins clearly. The i5-3230M's release date of 2012-12-31 came roughly seven months after the i5-3210M's 2012-05-31 launch, and the newer part delivers consistent small gains in the Cinebench family. The i5-3210M's Geekbench advantage, however, is too large to dismiss as noise. The verdict is workload-dependent: pick the i5-3230M for render threads, pick the i5-3210M for Geekbench-style mixed loads.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench R15 multicore test opens the comparison with the i5-3230M scoring 220 against the i5-3210M's 210, a 4.5% delta. The i5-3230M extends that lead in Cinebench R20 multicore, posting 917 versus 879, a 4.1% margin. The single-core R20 test shows a similar pattern: 129 versus 123, a 4.7% lead for the i5-3230M. Cinebench R23 multicore follows with 2184 versus 2095 (4.1%), and R23 single-core closes the Cinebench sweep with 308 versus 295 (4.2%).

The Geekbench results reverse the trend decisively. The i5-3210M scores 1116 in multicore against the i5-3230M's 1018, a 9.6% lead. The single-core Geekbench test shows an even larger gap: 587 versus 505, a 16.2% advantage for the i5-3210M. The 16.2% delta is the single largest margin in the head-to-head set, nearly four times larger than any Cinebench gap.

The Cinebench margins are tightly grouped between 4.1% and 4.7%, suggesting the i5-3230M's clock advantage translates uniformly across rendering workloads. The Geekbench margins are much larger and favor the older chip despite its lower clocks. The recorded data does not attribute this reversal to any specific architectural feature, but the consistency of the Cinebench results and the magnitude of the Geekbench results indicate the two processors behave differently under different benchmark harnesses.

Average scores from the broader database place the i5-3210M at 758 and the i5-3230M at 754, with the i5-3210M marginally ahead despite losing five of seven head-to-head tests. This apparent contradiction resolves when weighting the Geekbench wins: the 16.2% single-core and 9.6% multicore margins contribute more to the average than the smaller Cinebench deltas.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU wins more benchmarks head-to-head?

A: The Intel Core i5-3230M wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests. The Intel Core i5-3210M wins the remaining two.

Q: How large is the Cinebench advantage for the i5-3230M?

A: The i5-3230M leads by 4.5% in Cinebench R15 multicore, 4.1% in R20 multicore, 4.7% in R20 single-core, 4.1% in R23 multicore, and 4.2% in R23 single-core.

Q: How large is the Geekbench advantage for the i5-3210M?

A: The i5-3210M leads by 9.6% in Geekbench multicore (1116 vs 1018) and 16.2% in Geekbench single-core (587 vs 505).

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for each CPU?

A: The i5-3210M has an average benchmark score of 758, and the i5-3230M has an average of 754. Both sit at the 20th percentile of all CPUs in the database.

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

A: The i5-3210M's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i3-5020U (757, 0.1% behind), Intel Xeon E5450 (756, 0.2% behind), Intel Core i5-4250U (756, 0.3% behind), and Intel Core i3-3240 (761, 0.3% ahead). The i5-3230M's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon X5460 (754, 0% delta), Intel Core i5-4250U (756, 0.2% ahead), Intel Xeon E5450 (756, 0.3% ahead), and Intel Core i3-5020U (757, 0.4% ahead).

Q: Do both CPUs share the same architecture and socket?

A: Yes, both use the Ivy Bridge architecture, the Intel Socket G2 (988B), and the 22 nm process node with a 118 mm² die size.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on the same Ivy Bridge architecture, codenamed Ivy Bridge, using Intel's 22 nm process node with a 118 mm² die size. Each has 2 cores and 4 threads, a 35 W TDP, and the Intel Socket G2 (988B). The integrated graphics are identical: Intel HD 4000. Both support dual-channel memory and do not support ECC memory. Neither is multiplier unlocked.

The cache layout is identical: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3. The memory bus is dual-channel for both, and the i5-3230M explicitly lists DDR3 memory support while the i5-3210M does not specify a memory type in the database. The part numbers differ: SR0MZ for the i5-3210M and SR0WY for the i5-3230M.

The primary architectural difference is clock speed. The i5-3230M runs at a 2.60 GHz base clock and 3.20 GHz boost, while the i5-3210M runs at 2.50 GHz base and 3.10 GHz boost. That 0.10 GHz difference in both base and boost is the only recorded specification that separates the two chips. The release dates differ as well: the i5-3210M launched on 2012-05-31 and the i5-3230M on 2012-12-31.

The die size, process node, cache hierarchy, core count, thread count, TDP, socket, and integrated graphics are all identical. The market segment for both is mobile, and both belong to the Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) generation. The database does not record a launch MSRP for either chip, and neither supports ECC memory. The only functional differences are the 100 MHz clock advantage for the i5-3230M and the later release date. The Geekbench results favoring the i5-3210M cannot be explained by any architectural difference in the recorded data, since the two parts are specification-identical apart from clocks.