Intel Core i5-3320M vs Intel Core i5-L16G7 Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split between these two mobile processors is unusually one-sided. Across every recorded head-to-head test, the Intel Core i5-L16G7 claims the win, while the Intel Core i5-3320M does not take a single benchmark. That does not mean the older chip is without merit, but the data is clear about where each part is stronger.

The Core i5-L16G7 wins in both single-core and multi-core workloads. Its advantage appears in Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, which means the lead holds across different rendering engines and workload scaling patterns. The largest single delta is in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the L16G7 leads by 24.1 percent. The smallest delta is in Cinebench R15 multi-core, where the lead narrows to 23.8 percent. Across the board, the margins are remarkably consistent, hovering in the 23 to 24 percent range rather than varying by test type.

The Core i5-3320M does have a unique data point that the L16G7 lacks: a Geekbench result. In Geekbench multi-core, the 3320M scores 1146, and in single-core it scores 589. These numbers cannot be compared directly to the L16G7 because no Geekbench result exists for the newer chip in the database. Still, they give some context for where the 3320M sits in absolute terms.

For workload suitability, the L16G7 is the better choice for rendering, compilation, or any task that stresses both single-thread responsiveness and multi-thread throughput. The 3320M, despite its smaller core count, posts respectable absolute scores, but it is outclassed in every category where both chips have recorded measurements. The 3320M may still be relevant for legacy software compatibility or systems where its specific platform features matter, but the raw compute data favors the L16G7 without exception.

Architecture Differences

The two processors come from very different design philosophies. The Core i5-L16G7 uses the Lakefield architecture, built on a 10 nm process at Intel. It packs 5 cores and 5 threads, which is an unusual configuration: five physical cores with no hyper-threading. The Core i5-3320M uses the Ivy Bridge architecture, built on a 22 nm process, with 2 cores and 4 threads, meaning it relies on hyper-threading to reach its thread count.

The process node gap is significant. The L16G7's 10 nm process is two generations ahead of the 3320M's 22 nm process. That helps explain the power envelope difference: the L16G7 has a TDP of 7 watts while the 3320M draws 35 watts. The newer chip delivers higher performance while consuming dramatically less power, a direct result of the manufacturing advantage.

Cache layouts also differ. The L16G7 has 80 KB of L1 cache, 512 KB of L2 cache, and 4 MB of shared L3 cache. The 3320M has 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 3 MB of shared L3. On a per-core basis, the 3320M's L1 and L2 allocations look generous, but the L16G7's larger shared L3 pool gives it more aggregate cache to work with across its five cores.

Memory support is another differentiator. The L16G7 supports LPDDR4X memory on a single-channel bus with a recorded bandwidth of 17.1 GB/s. The 3320M supports dual-channel memory, though the database does not list a bandwidth figure for it. The L16G7 also has a PCIe Gen 3 interface with 6 lanes available from the CPU, while no PCIe details are recorded for the 3320M.

The integrated graphics differ as well. The L16G7 pairs with UHD Graphics 64EU, while the 3320M uses Intel HD 4000. The L16G7's newer GPU architecture and higher execution unit count suggest a more capable iGPU, though the database does not include graphics benchmarks for either part.

Die size is notable: the L16G7 measures 82 mm² with 4,050 million transistors, while the 3320M measures 118 mm² with no transistor count listed. The L16G7 packs more transistors into a smaller die, another sign of the process advantage. The 3320M uses socket Intel BGA 1023, while no socket is recorded for the L16G7.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The recorded head-to-head results show a consistent pattern of L16G7 dominance. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the L16G7 scores 281 against the 3320M's 227, a 23.8 percent advantage. This is the smallest margin of any test, but it still represents a decisive win.

Cinebench R20 multi-core shows a similar story: the L16G7 scores 1173, the 3320M scores 948, and the delta is 23.7 percent. The single-core R20 test is where the L16G7 stretches its lead furthest, scoring 165 against 133, a 24.1 percent gap. This is the largest delta in the entire comparison.

Cinebench R23 multi-core puts the L16G7 at 2793 and the 3320M at 2258, a 23.7 percent difference. The R23 single-core test shows 394 versus 318, a 23.9 percent gap. Every delta falls between 23.7 and 24.1 percent, which suggests the performance difference is uniform across both single-threaded and multi-threaded workloads. There is no test where the 3320M narrows the gap meaningfully, and no test where the L16G7 runs away beyond its usual margin.

The average benchmark score in the database tells the same story from a different angle. The L16G7 has an average score of 816, while the 3320M averages 803. The L16G7's nearest rivals include the Intel Xeon X3440 at 815, the Intel Core 2 Extreme QX9775 at 813, and the Intel Core i7-5550U at 813, all within 0.4 percent. The 3320M's nearest rivals include the AMD A10-7700K at 801, the AMD Ryzen 3 2200U at 805, and the Intel Xeon E5530 at 801, all within 0.3 percent. Both chips sit at the 22nd percentile among all CPUs, meaning they occupy similar positions in the overall performance distribution despite the head-to-head gap.

The wins tally in the database is 5 for the L16G7 and 0 for the 3320M. That is a complete sweep. The margins are not flukes of a single benchmark; they repeat across three Cinebench versions and both single-core and multi-core modes.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion. The Intel Core i5-L16G7 outperforms the Intel Core i5-3320M in every benchmark where both have recorded scores. The lead is consistent, sitting around 24 percent in single-core tests and just under that in multi-core tests. The L16G7 accomplishes this while drawing 7 watts against the 3320M's 35 watts, a fivefold power advantage. For any workload that relies on CPU compute, the L16G7 is the stronger part.

The 3320M is not without its own context. It reaches the same 22nd percentile among all CPUs as the L16G7, and its average benchmark score of 803 is only 13 points behind the L16G7's 816. In absolute terms, the 3320M is a functional processor. It has a dual-channel memory bus, which the L16G7 lacks, and it uses a socketed design, Intel BGA 1023, which may matter for certain platforms. The 3320M also has a recorded release date of May 2012, making it an older design.

Who should pick the L16G7? Anyone running Cinebench-style workloads, which are representative of rendering and other multi-threaded compute tasks, will get roughly 24 percent more performance. The lower TDP also makes it suitable for thermally constrained systems. Who should pick the 3320M? Users who need dual-channel memory support or who require a socketed mobile processor on the Intel BGA 1023 platform. The 3320M's Geekbench results, 1146 multi-core and 589 single-core, also provide a reference point for non-Cinebench workloads, but no comparable L16G7 data exists in the database to make a direct call.

The verdict, strictly from the data: the L16G7 is the better CPU for raw performance and efficiency. The 3320M remains a viable part for specific platform requirements, but it loses every measured compute comparison.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i5-L16G7 wins all three multi-core tests. It leads by 23.8 percent in Cinebench R15, 23.7 percent in Cinebench R20, and 23.7 percent in Cinebench R23.

Q: How big is the single-core performance gap?

A: The L16G7 leads by 24.1 percent in Cinebench R20 single-core and 23.9 percent in Cinebench R23 single-core. No single-core Cinebench R15 result is recorded for the 3320M.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each chip?

A: The Core i5-L16G7 has 5 cores and 5 threads. The Core i5-3320M has 2 cores and 4 threads.

Q: How do their power requirements compare?

A: The L16G7 has a TDP of 7 watts, while the 3320M has a TDP of 35 watts.

Q: Do both chips support ECC memory?

A: No. Both the L16G7 and the 3320M have ECC memory support listed as false.

Q: What is the L16G7's launch MSRP?

A: The L16G7 has a launch MSRP of $281. No launch MSRP is recorded for the 3320M.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ across nearly every recorded specification category.

• Cores: L16G7 has 5 cores; 3320M has 2 cores.
• Threads: L16G7 has 5 threads; 3320M has 4 threads.
• Base clock: L16G7 runs at 1400.00 MHz; 3320M runs at 2.60 GHz.
• Boost clock: L16G7 boosts to 3.00 GHz; 3320M boosts to 3.30 GHz.
• TDP: L16G7 is rated at 7 watts; 3320M is rated at 35 watts.
• Socket: L16G7 has no recorded socket; 3320M uses Intel BGA 1023.
• Architecture: L16G7 uses Lakefield; 3320M uses Ivy Bridge.
• Process node: L16G7 is built on 10 nm; 3320M is built on 22 nm.
• Transistors: L16G7 has 4,050 million; 3320M has no recorded count.
• Die size: L16G7 measures 82 mm²; 3320M measures 118 mm².
• L1 cache: L16G7 has 80 KB total; 3320M has 64 KB per core.
• L2 cache: L16G7 has 512 KB total; 3320M has 256 KB per core.
• L3 cache: L16G7 has 4 MB shared; 3320M has 3 MB shared.
• Memory support: L16G7 supports LPDDR4X; 3320M has no recorded memory type.
• Memory bus: L16G7 is single-channel; 3320M is dual-channel.
• Memory bandwidth: L16G7 has 17.1 GB/s; 3320M has no recorded bandwidth.
• PCIe: L16G7 has Gen 3 with 6 lanes from the CPU; 3320M has no recorded PCIe details.
• Integrated graphics: L16G7 uses UHD Graphics 64EU; 3320M uses Intel HD 4000.
• Release date: L16G7 has no recorded release date; 3320M released on 2012-05-31.
• Part number: L16G7 is listed as SRH4U, SRJGA; 3320M is listed as SR0MY.