Intel Pentium 2117U vs Core i3 2310M |
Released September, 2012
Intel Pentium 2117U
- 1.8 GHz
- Dual core
6.2 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Intel Pentium 2117U
 | Newer manufacturing process 22 nms | | Significantly lower typical power consumption 13.81W |
| | More number of displays supported 3 | | Supports more RAM 32,768 MB |
VS
Released February, 2011
Intel Core i3 2310M
- 2.1 GHz
- Dual core
6.3 Out of 10
Reasons to buy the Core i3 2310M
| | Is hyperthreaded Yes | | Higher clock speed 2.1 GHz |
| | More l3 cache 3 MB | | More threads 4 |
The Intel Pentium 2117U versus the Core i3 2310M is an interesting match up between two processors from different generations, which are suited for different purposes.
First is the 2117U, which is part of the newer Ivy Bridge architecture. It has a dual core 1.8GHz with 2 threads, and which is not hyperthreaded. These specs may seem underwhelming on paper, but this is because “U” stands for Ultraportable, designed for laptops whose focus is on being thin and light. An advantage of this is that it has a lower TDP of 17W versus 35W in the 2310M.
On the other hand, the 2310M belongs to the older Sandy Bridge chipset. Also dual core, it has a higher clock speed of 2.1GHz with 4 threads, and is hyperthreaded. This results to a more efficient use of processor cores, and although this chip is older than the 2117U by 19 months, it still manages to get 700 more points in the PassMark benchmark as well as other tests.
Thus for the discerning buyer, pick what best suits your needs: for portability and value, go for the Intel Pentium 2117U; but for speed and performance, pick the Intel Core i3 2310M.
CPUBoss Review Our evaluation of 2117U vs 2310M
Performance | |
Benchmark performance using all cores | |
| 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?
VS
Differences What are the advantages of each
| |||||||
| Newer manufacturing process | 22 nms | vs | 32 nms | A newer manufacturing process allows for a more powerful, yet cooler running processor | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Significantly lower typical power consumption | 13.81W | vs | 28.44W | 2.1x lower typical power consumption | |||
| More number of displays supported | 3 | vs | 2 | 1 more number of displays supported | |||
| Supports more RAM | 32,768 MB | vs | 16,384 MB | Supports 2x more RAM | |||
| Newer | Sep, 2012 | vs | Feb, 2011 | Release date over 1 years later | |||
| Higher Maximum Operating Temperature | 105 °C | vs | 100 °C | 5% higher Maximum Operating Temperature | |||
| Slightly better performance per watt | 15.23 pt/W | vs | 10.17 pt/W | Around 50% better performance per watt | |||
| Significantly lower annual home energy cost | 4.1 $/year | vs | 8.43 $/year | 2.1x lower annual home energy cost | |||
| |||||||
| Is hyperthreaded | Yes | vs | No | Somewhat common; Maximizes usage of each CPU core | |||
| Higher clock speed | 2.1 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 15% higher clock speed | |||
| More l3 cache | 3 MB | vs | 2 MB | 50% more l3 cache; more data can be stored in the l3 cache for quick access later | |||
| More threads | 4 | vs | 2 | Twice as many threads | |||
| Better performance per dollar | 4.45 pt/$ | vs | 1.93 pt/$ | More than 2.2x better performance per dollar | |||
| Better turbo clock speed | 1,100 MHz | vs | 1,000 MHz | 10% better turbo clock speed | |||
| More l3 cache per core | 1.5 MB/core | vs | 1 MB/core | 50% more l3 cache per core | |||
| Better PassMark score | 2,420 | vs | 1,650 | More than 45% better PassMark score | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Air) | 2.12 GHz | vs | 1.84 GHz | More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Air) | |||
| Better overclocked clock speed (Water) | 2.1 GHz | vs | 1.8 GHz | More than 15% better overclocked clock speed (Water) | |||
Report a correction
Benchmarks Real world tests of Pentium 2117U vs Core i3 2310M
GeekBench (32-bit)
GeekBench (64-bit)
GeekBench
Passmark
Passmark (Single Core)
Specifications Full list of technical specs
summary | Pentium 2117U | vs | Core i3 2310M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Clock speed | 1.8 GHz | 2.1 GHz | |
| Cores | Dual core | Dual core | |
| Socket type | |||
| BGA 1023 | |||
| Is hyperthreaded | No | Yes | |
features | |||
| Has a NX bit | Yes | Yes | |
| Supports trusted computing | No | No | |
| Has virtualization support | Yes | Yes | |
| Instruction-set-extensions | |||
| MMX | |||
| SSE | |||
| SSE4.2 | |||
| AVX | |||
| SSE3 | |||
| SSE2 | |||
| Supplemental SSE3 | |||
| SSE4.1 | |||
| SSE4 | |||
| Supports dynamic frequency scaling | Yes | Yes | |
gpu | |||
| GPU | GPU | GPU | |
| Label | Intel® HD Graphics | Intel® HD Graphics 3000 | |
| Number of displays supported | 3 | 2 | |
| GPU clock speed | 350 MHz | 650 MHz | |
| Turbo clock speed | 1,000 MHz | 1,100 MHz | |
memory controller | |||
| Memory controller | Built-in | Built-in | |
| Memory type | |||
| DDR3-1333 | |||
| DDR3-1066 | |||
| DDR3 | |||
| Channels | Dual Channel | Dual Channel | |
| Supports ECC | No | No | |
| Maximum bandwidth | 12,800 MB/s | 21,333.32 MB/s | |
| Maximum memory size | 32,768 MB | 16,384 MB | |
details | Pentium 2117U | vs | Core i3 2310M |
|---|---|---|---|
| Architecture | x86-64 | x86-64 | |
| Threads | 2 | 4 | |
| L2 cache | 1 MB | 1 MB | |
| L2 cache per core | 0.5 MB/core | 0.5 MB/core | |
| L3 cache | 2 MB | 3 MB | |
| L3 cache per core | 1 MB/core | 1.5 MB/core | |
| Manufacture process | 22 nms | 32 nms | |
| Max CPUs | 1 | 1 | |
| Clock multiplier | 18 | 21 | |
| Operating temperature | Unknown - 105°C | Unknown - 100°C | |
overclocking | |||
| Overclocked clock speed | 1.84 GHz | 2.12 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Water) | 1.8 GHz | 2.1 GHz | |
| Overclocked clock speed (Air) | 1.84 GHz | 2.12 GHz | |
power consumption | |||
| TDP | 17W | 35W | |
| Annual home energy cost | 4.1 $/year | 8.43 $/year | |
| Performance per watt | 15.23 pt/W | 10.17 pt/W | |
| Typical power consumption | 13.81W | 28.44W | |
bus | |||
| Architecture | DMI | DMI | |
| Number of links | 1 | 1 | |
| Transfer rate | 5,000 MT/s | 5,000 MT/s | |
 Intel Pentium 2117U  Report a correction |  Intel Core i3 2310M Report a correction |
Follow us
Compare
Related Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $341 | $134 | |
| 3217U vs 2117U | ||
 | VS | |
| $134 | ||
| N2830 vs 2117U | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $134 | |
| N3530 vs 2117U | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $134 | |
| 3558U vs 2117U | ||
 | VS | |
| $161 | $134 | |
| N3540 vs 2117U | ||
 | VS | |
| $75 | $134 | |
| 1007U vs 2117U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $134 | $138 | |
| B950 vs 2310M | ||
Popular Comparisons
 | VS |  |
| $281 | ||
| 6410 vs 4200U | ||
 | VS |  |
| $235 | $330 | |
| 9590 vs 4770K | ||
 | VS |  |
| $369 | $320 | |
| 5820K vs 4790K | ||
 | VS | |
| $235 | $320 | |
| 4690K vs 4790K | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $275 | |
| N3540 vs 4005U | ||
| | VS |  |
| $161 | $85 | |
| N3530 vs 3110M | ||
| | VS | |
| $320 | $330 | |
| 4790K vs 4770K | ||
Read more
Comments
Showing 2 comments.
