Intel Core i5-3230M vs Intel Core i5-4250U Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark data splits this comparison cleanly into two very different profiles. The Intel Core i5-3230M wins five of the seven recorded head-to-head tests, sweeping every Cinebench workload. The Intel Core i5-4250U wins the two Geekbench tests, and it wins them by such a wide margin that its average benchmark score ends up effectively tied with the i5-3230M despite losing the majority of tests.

The i5-3230M dominates the Cinebench suite. In Cinebench R15 multicore, it scores 220 against the i5-4250U's 182, a 17.3% advantage. That same pattern repeats across Cinebench R20 multicore (917 versus 760, 17.1% ahead), Cinebench R20 singlecore (129 versus 107, 17.1% ahead), Cinebench R23 multicore (2184 versus 1811, 17.1% ahead), and Cinebench R23 singlecore (308 versus 255, 17.2% ahead). The consistency is striking: every Cinebench result lands within a narrow band of a 17% to 17.3% lead for the i5-3230M.

The i5-4250U's wins are in Geekbench, and they are not marginal. In Geekbench multicore, the i5-4250U scores 1434 against 1018 for the i5-3230M, a 40.9% advantage. In Geekbench singlecore, it scores 742 against 505, a 46.9% advantage. These are decisive victories that more than offset the Cinebench losses in the aggregate scoring.

The practical interpretation is straightforward. For workloads that resemble Cinebench, meaning sustained multi-threaded rendering and CPU-intensive compute, the i5-3230M is the stronger part. For workloads that resemble Geekbench, which tends to emphasize shorter bursts and mixed integer and floating point operations, the i5-4250U shows a substantial edge. The average benchmark scores reflect this split: the i5-4250U averages 756, the i5-3230M averages 754, a difference of only 0.2% in the i5-4250U's favor. Both parts sit at the 20th percentile among all CPUs in the database, meaning they occupy the same overall performance tier despite their very different strengths.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from different Intel microarchitectures and generations, which explains their behavioral differences. The i5-4250U is built on the Haswell architecture, released in June 2013, while the i5-3230M uses the older Ivy Bridge architecture, released in December 2012. Both are manufactured on Intel's 22 nm process node, and both have a die size of 118 mm². The i5-4250U lists 1,400 million transistors in its design; the i5-3230M does not have a recorded transistor count in the database.

Core and thread counts are identical: both have 2 cores and 4 threads. Cache structures also match exactly. Each has 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. Neither supports ECC memory, and neither has an unlocked multiplier.

The differences that matter are in clock speeds, power envelope, socket, and integrated graphics. The i5-3230M runs at a 2.60 GHz base clock and boosts to 3.20 GHz. The i5-4250U runs at a 1.30 GHz base clock and boosts to 2.60 GHz. The i5-3230M's base clock is exactly double that of the i5-4250U, and its boost clock is 0.60 GHz higher. This clock advantage is the primary reason the i5-3230M wins the Cinebench tests, which are sensitive to sustained clock speed.

The power envelope tells the opposite story. The i5-4250U has a 15 W TDP, while the i5-3230M has a 35 W TDP. The i5-4250U is designed for ultra-low-power operation, which explains its much lower base clock. The i5-3230M is a higher-power part that can sustain higher clocks for longer periods. This difference in TDP is the single largest architectural gap between the two.

The sockets also differ. The i5-4250U uses Intel BGA 1168, a soldered mobile socket, while the i5-3230M uses Intel Socket G2 (988B), a replaceable mobile socket. The integrated graphics differ as well: the i5-4250U carries Intel HD 5000, while the i5-3230M carries Intel HD 4000. Both support DDR3 memory, though the i5-3230M explicitly records dual-channel memory bus support while the i5-4250U does not list a memory bus configuration.

The Verdict

The data supports a clear conclusion: the i5-3230M is the better choice for sustained compute workloads, while the i5-4250U wins on shorter-burst performance and efficiency. The i5-3230M leads every Cinebench result by roughly 17%, a consistent and meaningful margin that reflects its higher base and boost clocks. For rendering, video encoding, or any workload that keeps the CPU fully loaded for extended periods, the i5-3230M is the stronger processor.

The i5-4250U, however, delivers a 40.9% multicore and 46.9% singlecore advantage in Geekbench. This suggests its Haswell architecture extracts more work per clock cycle, and its lower TDP of 15 W versus 35 W makes it the far more power-efficient option. For thin-and-light laptops where battery life and thermal output matter more than sustained all-core performance, the i5-4250U is the better fit.

The aggregate numbers show how close these parts are overall. The i5-4250U averages 756 across all benchmark scores, the i5-3230M averages 754. That 0.2% difference is within noise. Both sit at the 20th percentile of all CPUs. The nearest rivals for the i5-4250U include the i5-3230M itself at a 0.2% delta, the Intel Xeon E5450 at -0.1%, and the Intel Core i3-5020U at -0.2%. The nearest rivals for the i5-3230M include the Intel Xeon X5460 at 0% delta, the i5-4250U at -0.2%, and the Intel Xeon E5450 at -0.3%.

Users who need maximum sustained throughput should pick the i5-3230M. Users who prioritize burst performance and low power consumption should pick the i5-4250U. Neither part is a clear overall winner; the choice depends entirely on workload profile.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i5-4250U has an average benchmark score of 756, while the Intel Core i5-3230M has an average of 754. The difference is 0.2% in favor of the i5-4250U.

Q: How much faster is the i5-3230M in Cinebench R23 multicore?

A: The i5-3230M scores 2184 in Cinebench R23 multicore, while the i5-4250U scores 1811. The i5-3230M leads by 17.1%.

Q: How much faster is the i5-4250U in Geekbench singlecore?

A: The i5-4250U scores 742 in Geekbench singlecore, while the i5-3230M scores 505. The i5-4250U leads by 46.9%.

Q: Do both processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 2 cores and 4 threads. They also share identical cache configurations: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i5-4250U has a TDP of 15 W, while the i5-3230M has a TDP of 35 W. The i5-4250U uses less than half the power budget.

Q: Which processor has the higher boost clock?

A: The i5-3230M boosts to 3.20 GHz, while the i5-4250U boosts to 2.60 GHz. The i5-3230M also has a higher base clock at 2.60 GHz versus 1.30 GHz.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Cinebench results are uniform across the board. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i5-3230M scores 220 against 182, a 17.3% lead. In Cinebench R20 multicore, the scores are 917 versus 760, a 17.1% lead. In Cinebench R20 singlecore, the scores are 129 versus 107, again 17.1%. In Cinebench R23 multicore, the scores are 2184 versus 1811, a 17.1% lead. In Cinebench R23 singlecore, the scores are 308 versus 255, a 17.2% lead. The consistency of this margin, never straying outside 17.1% to 17.3%, indicates a fundamental clock-speed advantage rather than any workload-specific quirk.

The Geekbench results flip the script completely. In Geekbench multicore, the i5-4250U scores 1434 against 1018, a 40.9% lead. In Geekbench singlecore, the i5-4250U scores 742 against 505, a 46.9% lead. These gaps are more than double the Cinebench margins in relative terms, and they show that the Haswell architecture in the i5-4250U is substantially more efficient per clock than the Ivy Bridge design in the i5-3230M, at least under Geekbench's workload pattern.

The net effect is a near dead heat in aggregate performance. The i5-4250U wins 2 of the 7 head-to-head tests, the i5-3230M wins 5. But because the i5-4250U's wins are so much larger in percentage terms, the average scores converge to 756 versus 754. The database records both processors at the 20th percentile among all CPUs, confirming that they belong to the same performance class. The nearest rival list reinforces this: the i5-4250U's closest rival is the Intel Xeon E5450 at -0.1%, and the i5-3230M's closest rival is the Intel Xeon X5460 at 0% delta. Each processor's nearest rivals include the other at a delta of only 0.2%.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The base clocks are 1.30 GHz for the i5-4250U and 2.60 GHz for the i5-3230M. The boost clocks are 2.60 GHz for the i5-4250U and 3.20 GHz for the i5-3230M. The TDP values are 15 W for the i5-4250U and 35 W for the i5-3230M.

The sockets are different: Intel BGA 1168 for the i5-4250U versus Intel Socket G2 (988B) for the i5-3230M. The architectures differ: Haswell for the i5-4250U versus Ivy Bridge for the i5-3230M. The release dates differ: June 2013 for the i5-4250U versus December 2012 for the i5-3230M.

The integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 5000 for the i5-4250U versus Intel HD 4000 for the i5-3230M. The transistor count is recorded for the i5-4250U at 1,400 million, while no transistor count is listed for the i5-3230M. The memory bus is recorded as dual-channel for the i5-3230M, while no memory bus configuration is listed for the i5-4250U. The part numbers differ: SR16M for the i5-4250U and SR0WY for the i5-3230M.

The specifications that match are equally notable: both have 2 cores, 4 threads, 22 nm process node, 118 mm² die size, identical L1 and L2 cache per core, 3 MB shared L3 cache, DDR3 memory support, no ECC support, no unlocked multiplier, and Intel as the manufacturer.