Intel Core i5-3210M vs Intel Core i5-4200U Comparison

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark data reveals a clear split between these two mobile processors, with the Intel Core i5-3210M dominating the Cinebench suite while the Intel Core i5-4200U takes decisive victories in Geekbench. Across the seven recorded head-to-head tests, the i5-3210M wins five and the i5-4200U wins two, but the margins tell a more nuanced story.

Starting with Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-3210M scores 210 against the i5-4200U’s 186, a 12.9% advantage. That pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i5-3210M posts 879 versus 777, a 13.1% lead. The single-core results follow suit: Cinebench R20 single-core shows 123 for the i5-3210M against 109 for the i5-4200U, a 12.8% gap, while Cinebench R23 single-core gives the i5-3210M 295 versus 261, a 13% edge. The largest Cinebench margin appears in R23 multi-core, where the i5-3210M’s 2095 outpaces the i5-4200U’s 1852 by 13.1%.

The Geekbench results flip the narrative entirely. In Geekbench multi-core, the i5-4200U scores 1308 against the i5-3210M’s 1116, a 14.7% advantage for the newer chip. Even more striking, Geekbench single-core gives the i5-4200U 728 versus 587, a 19.4% lead. These are substantial margins, suggesting that the i5-4200U’s architecture handles certain workloads far more efficiently despite lower raw clock speeds.

What makes this interesting is the consistency within each suite. The i5-3210M wins every Cinebench test by nearly identical percentages (12.8% to 13.1%), while the i5-4200U wins both Geekbench tests by larger margins (14.7% and 19.4%). This points to workload-specific strengths rather than a general performance hierarchy. The average benchmark scores reflect the split: the i5-3210M averages 758, landing 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-5020U and 0.2% above the Intel Xeon E5450, while the i5-4200U averages 746, sitting 0.1% above the AMD A10 PRO-7800B and 0.1% above the AMD FX-9800P. Both CPUs occupy the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they are statistically peers in overall performance.

Where Each One Wins

The use-case split is defined by the benchmark categories. The Intel Core i5-3210M is the stronger choice for Cinebench-style workloads, which are heavily threaded and reward sustained multi-core execution. Its Cinebench R15 multi-core score of 210, R20 multi-core score of 879, and R23 multi-core score of 2095 all outpace the i5-4200U by roughly 13%. For rendering tasks, video encoding, or any application that scales with core throughput, the i5-3210M holds a consistent edge. Even its single-core Cinebench results are superior, with R20 single-core at 123 versus 109 and R23 single-core at 295 versus 261, so it also leads in lightly threaded Cinebench tasks.

The Intel Core i5-4200U, conversely, wins decisively in Geekbench, which is often used to simulate real-world application responsiveness and memory latency patterns. Its Geekbench multi-core score of 1308 versus 1116 is a 14.7% improvement, and its single-core score of 728 versus 587 is a 19.4% improvement. This suggests the i5-4200U excels in scenarios like web browsing, office productivity, and general system interaction, where single-thread efficiency and memory access patterns dominate. The i5-4200U’s architecture appears to deliver higher instructions per clock in these contexts, even though its base clock is 1600 MHz compared to the i5-3210M’s 2.50 GHz and its boost clock is 2.60 GHz versus 3.10 GHz.

The data implies a trade-off: if the workload is heavily parallel and sustained, the i5-3210M’s higher clocks and older but robust architecture prevail. If the workload is bursty, latency-sensitive, or single-threaded in a Geekbench sense, the i5-4200U’s Haswell design pulls ahead. Neither chip is a universal winner, and the 20th percentile ranking for both confirms they are mid-pack processors in the broader database.

The Verdict

From the recorded data, the choice hinges on the intended use case. The Intel Core i5-3210M is the pick for users prioritizing multi-core rendering or CPU-bound content creation, as it beats the i5-4200U by 12.9% to 13.1% across all four Cinebench tests. Its average benchmark score of 758 also edges out the i5-4200U’s 746, and it sits slightly ahead of rivals like the Intel Core i3-5020U (0.1%) and Intel Xeon E5450 (0.2%). For a system dedicated to tasks like video export, 3D rendering, or batch processing, the i5-3210M delivers measurable gains.

The Intel Core i5-4200U is the better option for general-purpose responsiveness, based on its Geekbench dominance. Its single-core score of 728 is 19.4% higher than the i5-3210M’s 587, and its multi-core score of 1308 is 14.7% higher. This translates to snappier application launches, faster file operations, and better performance in software that relies on single-threaded execution. The i5-4200U also matches the i5-3210M in percentile ranking (20th) and trails only 1.6% in average score (746 versus 758), making it a competitive alternative for daily computing.

Strictly from the data, the i5-3210M wins on raw compute consistency, while the i5-4200U wins on efficiency-oriented benchmarks. Users who need maximum Cinebench throughput should choose the i5-3210M; users who value Geekbench-oriented responsiveness should choose the i5-4200U. The 5-2 win count for the i5-3210M is misleading because the Geekbench losses are larger in percentage terms than the Cinebench wins, so the overall performance gap is narrower than the win tally suggests.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher multi-core Cinebench score?

A: The Intel Core i5-3210M. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, it scores 2095 versus the i5-4200U’s 1852, a 13.1% advantage. The same pattern holds in R15 (210 versus 186) and R20 (879 versus 777).

Q: Does the Intel Core i5-4200U beat the i5-3210M in any benchmark?

A: Yes, in Geekbench. The i5-4200U scores 1308 in multi-core versus 1116 for the i5-3210M (a 14.7% lead) and 728 in single-core versus 587 (a 19.4% lead).

Q: What are the average benchmark scores for both CPUs?

A: The i5-3210M has an average benchmark score of 758, while the i5-4200U has 746. Both are at the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database.

Q: How close are these processors to their nearest rivals?

A: The i5-3210M is 0.1% above the Intel Core i3-5020U and 0.2% above the Intel Xeon E5450. The i5-4200U is 0.1% above the AMD A10 PRO-7800B and 0.1% above the AMD FX-9800P.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The Intel Core i5-3210M, with a boost clock of 3.10 GHz versus the i5-4200U’s 2.60 GHz. The i5-3210M also has a higher base clock at 2.50 GHz versus 1600 MHz.

Q: How many wins does each processor have in the head-to-head tests?

A: The i5-3210M wins 5 of the 7 tests, all Cinebench variants. The i5-4200U wins 2 tests, both Geekbench variants.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures. The Intel Core i5-3210M is based on Ivy Bridge, built on a 22 nm process node with a die size of 118 mm². The Intel Core i5-4200U is based on Haswell, also on a 22 nm node and the same 118 mm² die size, but it integrates 1,400 million transistors. Both use 2 cores and 4 threads, with identical cache layouts: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3.

The integrated graphics differ: the i5-3210M uses Intel HD 4000, while the i5-4200U uses Intel HD 4400. The i5-3210M has a dual-channel memory bus, whereas the i5-4200U lists DDR3 memory support without a specified bus width. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both are locked (multiplier unlocked: false). The i5-3210M uses Intel Socket G2 (988B) with part number SR0MZ, while the i5-4200U uses Intel BGA 1168 with part number SR170.

The release dates show a generational gap: the i5-3210M launched on 2012-05-31, while the i5-4200U arrived on 2013-06-03. The i5-3210M has a TDP of 35 watts, more than double the i5-4200U’s 15 watts, which explains why the i5-4200U is positioned for thinner, more power-efficient laptops despite its lower clocks.

Specification Differences

The recorded specifications show several key differences. The base clock is 2.50 GHz for the i5-3210M versus 1600 MHz for the i5-4200U. The boost clock is 3.10 GHz versus 2.60 GHz. The TDP is 35 watts versus 15 watts, a significant power envelope divergence. The socket is Intel Socket G2 (988B) for the i5-3210M and Intel BGA 1168 for the i5-4200U.

The architecture is Ivy Bridge versus Haswell, and the codenames match those architectures. The i5-4200U has a transistor count of 1,400 million, while the i5-3210M’s transistor count is not recorded. The integrated graphics are HD 4000 versus HD 4400. Memory support is listed as null for the i5-3210M and DDR3 for the i5-4200U; conversely, the memory bus is dual-channel for the i5-3210M and null for the i5-4200U. The part numbers differ (SR0MZ versus SR170), as do the release dates. Both share the same core count, thread count, process node, die size, cache hierarchy, and lack of ECC support and unlocked multiplier.