Core 2 Duo T5300 vs Core i3-350M

#ad 
Buy on Amazon
VS

Aggregate performance score

Core i3-350M
2010
2 cores / 4 threads, 35 Watt
0.68
+106%
Core 2 Duo T5300
2 cores / 2 threads, 34 Watt
0.33

Core i3-350M outperforms Core 2 Duo T5300 by a whopping 106% based on our aggregate benchmark results.

Primary details

Comparing Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.

Place in the ranking27343085
Place by popularitynot in top-100not in top-100
Market segmentLaptopLaptop
SeriesIntel Core i3Core 2 Duo
Power efficiency1.840.92
Architecture codenameArrandale (2010−2011)Merom (2006−2008)
Release date7 January 2010 (14 years ago)no data
Launch price (MSRP)$130no data

Detailed specifications

Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.

Physical cores2 (Dual-core)2 (Dual-core)
Threads42
Base clock speed2.26 GHz1.73 GHz
Boost clock speed0.27 GHz1.73 GHz
Bus typeDMI 1.0no data
Bus rate1 × 2.5 GT/s533 MHz
Multiplier17no data
L1 cache64K (per core)no data
L2 cache256K (per core)no data
L3 cache3 MB (shared)2 MB L2 Cache
Chip lithography32 nm65 nm
Die size81+114 mm2no data
Maximum core temperature90 °C for rPGA, 105 °C for BGA100 °C
Number of transistors382+177 Millionno data
64 bit support++
Windows 11 compatibility--

Compatibility

Information on Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.

Number of CPUs in a configuration1 (Uniprocessor)no data
SocketBGA1288,PGA988PPGA478
Power consumption (TDP)35 Watt34 Watt

Technologies and extensions

Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.

Instruction set extensionsIntel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2no data
FMA+-
Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST)++
Turbo Boost Technology--
Hyper-Threading Technology+-
Idle States+no data
Thermal Monitoring+-
Flex Memory Access+no data
Demand Based Switchingno data-
PAE36 Bitno data
FDI+no data
Fast Memory Access+no data
FSB parityno data-

Security technologies

Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.

TXT--
EDB++

Virtualization technologies

Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 are enumerated here.

VT-d-no data
VT-x+-
EPT+no data

Memory specs

Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.

Supported memory typesDDR3no data
Maximum memory size8 GBno data
Max memory channels2no data
Maximum memory bandwidth17.051 GB/sno data

Graphics specifications

General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.

Integrated graphics cardIntel HD Graphics for Previous Generation Intel Processorsno data
Clear Video+no data
Clear Video HD+no data
Graphics max frequency667 MHzno data

Graphics interfaces

Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300 integrated GPUs.

Number of displays supported2no data

Peripherals

Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300.

PCIe version2.0no data
PCI Express lanes16no data

Synthetic benchmark performance

Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.


Combined synthetic benchmark score

This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.

i3-350M 0.68
+106%
Core 2 Duo T5300 0.33

Passmark

Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.

i3-350M 1087
+105%
Core 2 Duo T5300 530

Gaming performance

Pros & cons summary


Performance score 0.68 0.33
Threads 4 2
Chip lithography 32 nm 65 nm
Power consumption (TDP) 35 Watt 34 Watt

i3-350M has a 106.1% higher aggregate performance score, 100% more threads, and a 103.1% more advanced lithography process.

Core 2 Duo T5300, on the other hand, has 2.9% lower power consumption.

The Core i3-350M is our recommended choice as it beats the Core 2 Duo T5300 in performance tests.


Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-350M and Core 2 Duo T5300, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.

Vote for your favorite

Do you think we are right or mistaken in our choice? Vote by clicking "Like" button near your favorite CPU.


Intel Core i3-350M
Core i3-350M
Intel Core 2 Duo T5300
Core 2 Duo T5300

Similar processor comparisons

We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.

Community ratings

Here you can see how users rate the processors, as well as rate them yourself.


3.3 266 votes

Rate Core i3-350M on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
2.7 14 votes

Rate Core 2 Duo T5300 on a scale of 1 to 5:

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5

Questions & comments

Here you can ask a question about Core i3-350M or Core 2 Duo T5300, agree or disagree with our judgements, or report an error or mismatch.