Intel Core i5-3230M vs Intel Core i5-4200U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark record splits cleanly between these two mobile processors. The Intel Core i5-3230M takes five of the seven recorded tests, while the Intel Core i5-4200U wins the remaining two. The split is not arbitrary: each processor dominates in a distinct category, and the pattern reflects their different design targets.

The i5-3230M wins every Cinebench test in the database. That includes the multicore and singlecore variants of Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. The margins are consistent, ranging from 17.9% to 18.3% across all six Cinebench comparisons. This is a uniform advantage in rendering workloads, which typically stress sustained CPU throughput.

The i5-4200U, by contrast, wins both Geekbench tests. Its Geekbench multicore score is 1308 against 1018 for the i5-3230M, a 22.2% advantage. The Geekbench singlecore gap is even larger at 30.6%, with 728 versus 505. Geekbench exercises a mix of integer, floating point, and memory operations, and its scoring tends to favor newer microarchitectures with better per-clock efficiency.

So the use-case split is straightforward. For Cinebench-style rendering, the i5-3230M is the stronger part. For Geekbench-style general compute, the i5-4200U leads. The data does not show a single overall winner; it shows two processors with different strengths depending on the workload family.

Architecture Differences

Both chips are built on Intel's 22 nm process node and share the same die size of 118 mm². Both have 2 cores and 4 threads, with identical cache hierarchies: 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3. The differences lie in the underlying architecture, clock behavior, integrated graphics, and power envelope.

The i5-3230M is based on Ivy Bridge, while the i5-4200U uses Haswell. Haswell is the newer microarchitecture, and the Geekbench results suggest it delivers better instructions per clock in many general-purpose workloads. However, the i5-3230M compensates with substantially higher clock speeds. Its base clock is 2.60 GHz and boost reaches 3.20 GHz. The i5-4200U has a base clock of 1600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz) and boosts to 2.60 GHz. That is a full 1.0 GHz difference in base clock and 0.6 GHz in boost, which explains why the older Ivy Bridge part wins the Cinebench tests despite the architectural gap.

The i5-3230M has a TDP of 35 watts, while the i5-4200U is rated at 15 watts. This more than halves the thermal design power, and it correlates with the clock speed difference. The i5-4200U also lists a transistor count of 1,400 million; the i5-3230M entry does not include that figure in the database.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The i5-3230M ships with Intel HD 4000, while the i5-4200U has Intel HD 4400. The i5-3230M uses the Intel Socket G2 (988B), and the i5-4200U is soldered to Intel BGA 1168. Both support DDR3 memory, and neither supports ECC. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. The i5-3230M release date is recorded as 2012-12-31, and the i5-4200U as 2013-06-03, roughly half a year apart.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results tell a consistent story. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-3230M scores 220 against 186 for the i5-4200U, a delta of 18.3%. The R20 multicore test shows 917 versus 777, an 18% gap. The R20 singlecore test shows 129 versus 109, again 18.3%. Cinebench R23 multicore gives 2184 versus 1852, a 17.9% lead. The R23 singlecore test gives 308 versus 261, an 18% difference. Across all six Cinebench variants, the i5-3230M leads by roughly 18%, with very little variation.

The Geekbench results flip the picture. In Geekbench multicore, the i5-4200U scores 1308 against 1018 for the i5-3230M. The delta is -22.2% when viewed from the i5-3230M's side, meaning the i5-4200U is more than a fifth faster. Geekbench singlecore is even more lopsided: 728 versus 505, a 30.6% advantage for the i5-4200U.

These two benchmark families are measuring different things. Cinebench is heavily threaded and sensitive to raw clock speed and sustained turbo behavior. The i5-3230M's higher clocks, especially its 3.20 GHz boost, give it a decisive edge. Geekbench includes more latency-sensitive and memory-access patterns where the Haswell architecture in the i5-4200U appears to extract more work per clock cycle, despite running at much lower frequencies.

The database also records average benchmark scores. The i5-3230M has an average of 754, and the i5-4200U has an average of 746. That difference is only about 1%, and both sit at the 20th percentile among all CPUs tested. The nearest rivals for the i5-3230M include the Intel Xeon X5460 at 754 (0% delta), the Intel Core i5-4250U at 756 (-0.2%), the Intel Xeon E5450 at 756 (-0.3%), and the Intel Core i3-5020U at 757 (-0.4%). For the i5-4200U, the nearest rivals are the AMD A10 PRO-7800B at 746 (0.1% delta), the AMD FX-9800P at 745 (0.1%), the Intel Core i5-750 at 747 (-0.2%), and the Intel Xeon E5520 at 742 (0.6%). Both chips are clustered with a group of mid-2000s-era desktop and low-power mobile parts, which puts their overall performance in context.

Specification Differences

The table below lists only the fields where the two processors differ, based on the recorded data.

| Specification | Intel Core i5-3230M | Intel Core i5-4200U |

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

| Architecture | Ivy Bridge | Haswell |

| Codename | Ivy Bridge | Haswell |

| Generation | Core i5 (Ivy Bridge) | Core i5 (Haswell) |

| Base clock | 2.60 GHz | 1600.00 MHz (1.60 GHz) |

| Boost clock | 3.20 GHz | 2.60 GHz |

| TDP | 35 watts | 15 watts |

| Socket | Intel Socket G2 (988B) | Intel BGA 1168 |

| Transistors | Not recorded | 1,400 million |

| Integrated graphics | Intel HD 4000 | Intel HD 4400 |

| Memory bus | Dual-channel | Not recorded |

| Release date | 2012-12-31 | 2013-06-03 |

| Part number | SR0WY | SR170 |

Shared specifications include 2 cores, 4 threads, 22 nm process node, 118 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, 3 MB shared L3, DDR3 memory support, no ECC support, and a locked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Core i5-3230M wins all six Cinebench comparisons in the database. Its lead ranges from 17.9% to 18.3% across R15, R20, and R23 multicore and singlecore variants.

Q: Which processor is faster in Geekbench tests?

A: The Intel Core i5-4200U wins both Geekbench tests. It leads by 22.2% in multicore (1308 versus 1018) and by 30.6% in singlecore (728 versus 505).

Q: Why does the i5-3230M win Cinebench despite being an older architecture?

A: The i5-3230M has a base clock of 2.60 GHz and a boost clock of 3.20 GHz, compared to 1.60 GHz base and 2.60 GHz boost for the i5-4200U. The higher clocks give it an advantage in Cinebench's rendering workloads.

Q: Why does the i5-4200U win Geekbench despite lower clock speeds?

A: The i5-4200U is based on the Haswell architecture, which is newer than the Ivy Bridge architecture in the i5-3230M. The Geekbench results indicate that Haswell delivers better performance per clock in the workloads that Geekbench exercises.

Q: Do the two processors have the same cache and core configuration?

A: Yes. Both have 2 cores, 4 threads, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, and 3 MB shared L3 cache.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i5-3230M has a TDP of 35 watts, while the i5-4200U has a TDP of 15 watts. The i5-4200U is designed for lower power consumption.

The Verdict

The data does not crown a single winner. The Intel Core i5-3230M is the clear choice for Cinebench-style rendering workloads, winning every such test by roughly 18%. Its higher base and boost clocks (2.60 GHz and 3.20 GHz respectively) overcome the architectural disadvantage of Ivy Bridge versus Haswell. Users who prioritize sustained multi-threaded compute in rendering applications should favor this part.

The Intel Core i5-4200U is the better option for Geekbench-style general compute. Its Haswell architecture delivers 22.2% higher multicore and 30.6% higher singlecore scores than the i5-3230M, even while running at significantly lower clocks. It also draws less than half the power, with a 15 watt TDP versus 35 watts. For workloads that resemble Geekbench's mixed integer and floating point patterns, and for systems where power efficiency matters, the i5-4200U is the stronger selection.

Both processors sit at the same 20th percentile among all CPUs, and their average benchmark scores are nearly identical (754 versus 746). The choice comes down to workload type. Cinebench-heavy usage points to the i5-3230M. Geekbench-heavy usage and lower power draw point to the i5-4200U.