CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3120M vs B830


Benchmark performance using all cores

PassMark and GeekBench (32-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

PassMark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?



How does CPUBoss rank the features of each product?

Features and specifications that differ between products

No winner declared

Too close to call

Cast your vote Do you agree or disagree with CPUBoss?

Thanks for adding your opinion. Follow us on Facebook to stay up to date with the latest news!

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i3 3120M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i3 3120M

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 40% higher clock speed
Much newer manufacturing process 22 nm vs 32 nm A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor
More l3 cache 3 MB vs 2 MB 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later
More number of displays supported 3 vs 2 1 more number of displays supported
More threads 4 vs 2 Twice as many threads
Supports more RAM 32,768 MB vs 16,384 MB Supports 2x more RAM
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,313 vs 867 More than 50% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better PassMark score 3,342 vs 1,560 Around 2.2x better PassMark score
More l3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core vs 1 MB/core 50% more l3 cache per core
Better geekbench (32-bit) score 3,978 vs 2,212 Around 80% better geekbench (32-bit) score
Better overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.53 GHz vs 1.98 GHz Around 30% better overclocked clock speed (Air)
Slightly better performance per dollar 3.22 pt/$ vs 2.72 pt/$ Around 20% better performance per dollar
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)
Front view of Intel Celeron B830

Reasons to consider the
Intel Celeron B830

Report a correction
Significantly higher Maximum operating temperature 100 °C vs 90 °C More than 10% higher Maximum operating temperature

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i3 3120M vs Celeron B830

GeekBench (32-bit) Data courtesy Primate Labs


PassMark Data courtesy PassMark

PassMark (Single Core) Data courtesy PassMark

Specifications Full list of technical specs


Core i3 3120M  vs
Celeron B830 
Clock speed 2.5 GHz 1.8 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
rPGA 988B


Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has virtualization support Yes Yes
Instruction set extensions
Supplemental SSE3
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

power consumption

TDP 35W 35W
Annual home energy cost 8.43 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 12.22 pt/W 6.67 pt/W
Typical power consumption 28.44W 28.44W


Architecture DMI DMI
Number of links 1 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s


Core i3 3120M  vs
Celeron B830 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 2
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 2 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nm 32 nm
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 25 18
Operating temperature Unknown - 90°C Unknown - 100°C


Overclocked clock speed 2.53 GHz 1.98 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.5 GHz 1.8 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.53 GHz 1.98 GHz

integrated graphics

Label Intel® HD Graphics 4000 Intel® HD Graphics
Number of displays supported 3 2
GPU clock speed 650 MHz 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz 1,050 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 21,333.32 MB/s
Maximum memory size 32,768 MB 16,384 MB
Intel Core i3 3120M
Report a correction
Intel Celeron B830
Report a correction

Read more


comments powered by Disqus