CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 3337U vs 3210M

Performance

Benchmark performance using all cores

3DMark06 (CPU), Passmark, GeekBench (32-bit) and GeekBench (64-bit)

Single-core Performance

Individual core benchmark performance

Passmark (Single Core)

Power Consumption

How much power does the processor require?

TDP

Features

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!
VS

Differences What are the advantages of each

Front view of Intel Core i5 3337U

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3337U

Report a correction
Significantly lower typical power consumption 13.81W vs 28.44W 2.1x lower typical power consumption
Better performance per watt 23.93 pt/W vs 14.68 pt/W Around 65% better performance per watt
Better geekbench (64-bit) score 6,811 vs 5,229 More than 30% better geekbench (64-bit) score
Significantly lower annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year vs 8.43 $/year 2.1x lower annual home energy cost
Marginally newer Jan, 2013 vs Jun, 2012 Release date 7 months later
Front view of Intel Core i5 3210M

Reasons to consider the
Intel Core i5 3210M

Report a correction
Significantly higher clock speed 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 40% higher clock speed
Higher turbo clock speed 3.1 GHz vs 2.7 GHz Around 15% higher turbo clock speed
Significantly higher GPU clock speed 650 MHz vs 350 MHz More than 85% higher GPU clock speed
Better 3DMark11 physics score 3,130 vs 1,970 Around 60% better 3DMark11 physics score
Better PassMark (Single core) score 1,524 vs 1,262 More than 20% better PassMark (Single core) score
Better performance per dollar 2.28 pt/$ vs 1.81 pt/$ More than 25% better performance per dollar
Slightly better PassMark score 3,823 vs 3,161 More than 20% better PassMark score
Significantly better overclocked clock speed (Water) 2.5 GHz vs 1.8 GHz Around 40% better overclocked clock speed (Water)

Benchmarks Real world tests of Core i5 3337U vs 3210M

3D Mark 11 (Physics)

Core i5 3337U Core i5 3210M @ community.futuremark.com

3D Mark 06 (CPU)

Passmark

Core i5 3337U Core i5 3210M @ cpubenchmark.net

Passmark (Single Core)

Specifications Full list of technical specs

summary

Core i5 3337U  vs
3210M 
Clock speed 1.8 GHz 2.5 GHz
Turbo clock speed 2.7 GHz 3.1 GHz
Cores Dual core Dual core
Socket type
BGA 1023
rPGA 988B
Is unlocked No No
Is hyperthreaded Yes Yes

features

Has a NX bit Yes Yes
Supports trusted computing No No
Has vitualization support Yes Yes
Instruction-set-extensions
MMX
SSE
SSE4.2
AVX
SSE3
SSE2
Supplemental SSE3
SSE4.1
SSE4
AES
Supports dynamic frequency scaling Yes Yes

gpu

GPU GPU GPU
Label Intel® HD Graphics 4000 HD 4000
GPU clock speed 350 MHz 650 MHz
Turbo clock speed 1,100 MHz 1,100 MHz

memory controller

Memory controller Built-in Built-in
Memory type
DDR3-1600
DDR3-1333
DDR3L-1333
DDR3L-1600
Channels Dual Channel Dual Channel
Supports ECC No No
Maximum bandwidth 25,600 MB/s 25,600 MB/s

details

Core i5 3337U  vs
3210M 
Architecture x86-64 x86-64
Threads 4 4
L2 cache 1 MB 1 MB
L2 cache per core 0.5 MB/core 0.5 MB/core
L3 cache 3 MB 3 MB
L3 cache per core 1.5 MB/core 1.5 MB/core
Manufacture process 22 nms 22 nms
Max CPUs 1 1
Clock multiplier 18 25
Operating temperature Unknown - 105°C Unknown - 105°C

overclocking

Overclocked clock speed 2.7 GHz 2.9 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Water) 1.8 GHz 2.5 GHz
Overclocked clock speed (Air) 2.7 GHz 2.9 GHz

power consumption

TDP 17W 35W
Annual home energy cost 4.1 $/year 8.43 $/year
Performance per watt 23.93 pt/W 14.68 pt/W
Typical power consumption 13.81W 28.44W

bus

Architecture DMI DMI 2.0
Number of links 1 1
Transfer rate 5,000 MT/s 5,000 MT/s
Intel Core i5 3337U
Report a correction
Intel Core i5 3210M
Report a correction

Comments

Showing 1 comment.
This information isn't correct. The i5 3337u DOES support ddr3 1600 and 1333 mhz. In fact the whole benchmark seems to be incorrect according to my own benchmarks
comments powered by Disqus