Core i3-1000NG4 vs Core i7-2657M

PassMark CPU Mark evaluates processor speed through complex mathematical computations. It provides a reliable metric to compare multi-core performance, where higher scores indicate faster processing for multitasking, gaming, and heavy workloads.

Head-to-Head Verdict, Benchmarks, Value & Long-Term Outlook

This comparison brings together gaming FPS, productivity performance, platform differences, power efficiency, pricing context, and upgrade path so you can see which CPU actually makes more sense.

Core i3-1000NG4

2020

Why buy it

✅Draws 9W instead of 17W, a 8W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2657M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Core i7-2657M

2011

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while Core i3-1000NG4 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,491 vs 3,530).
❌88.9% higher power demand at 17W vs 9W.

Core i3-1000NG4

2020

Core i7-2657M

2011

Why buy it

✅Draws 9W instead of 17W, a 8W reduction.

Why buy it

✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Integrated graphics onboard with HD Graphics 3000, while Core i3-1000NG4 needs a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌No integrated graphics, while Core i7-2657M can still boot and troubleshoot without a discrete GPU.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,491 vs 3,530).
❌88.9% higher power demand at 17W vs 9W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-1000NG4 better than Core i7-2657M?

Yes. Core i3-1000NG4 is the better overall CPU here. You are getting a 0.6% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which makes it the stronger all-around choice.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-1000NG4 is the better pick here. According to our tests, it delivers 0.6% more average FPS across 2 shared CPU game tests.

Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-1000NG4 is the better fit. You are getting 1.1% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?

Core i3-1000NG4 still looks like the safer overall buy. Core i3-1000NG4 is at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it gives you a 0.6% average FPS lead across 2 shared CPU game tests in our data.

Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?

Core i3-1000NG4 is the more future-proof choice for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2020 vs 2011) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 2/4. That extra compute headroom should age better as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Games Benchmarks

Paired with RTX 4090

To accurately isolate CPU performance, all benchmarks below use an NVIDIA RTX 4090 as the reference GPU. This eliminates GPU-side bottlenecks and highlights pure processing throughput differences between the CPUs.

Note: Real-world results may vary based on your actual GPU. CPU performance impact is more visible in processing-intensive titles and high-refresh-rate gaming scenarios.

Core i3-1000NG4 Benchmark Check

Core i7-2657M Benchmark Check

Path of Exile 2

Preset	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
1080p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	77 FPS	77 FPS
1440p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	83 FPS	83 FPS
ultra	65 FPS	65 FPS
4K
low	67 FPS	66 FPS
medium	57 FPS	57 FPS
high	43 FPS	43 FPS
ultra	34 FPS	34 FPS

Open Core i3-1000NG4 Open Core i7-2657M

Path of Exile 2

Path of Exile 2

Counter-Strike 2

Preset	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
1080p
low	77 FPS	67 FPS
medium	69 FPS	60 FPS
high	63 FPS	56 FPS
ultra	46 FPS	41 FPS
1440p
low	63 FPS	55 FPS
medium	55 FPS	48 FPS
high	52 FPS	45 FPS
ultra	40 FPS	36 FPS
4K
low	44 FPS	39 FPS
medium	40 FPS	35 FPS
high	30 FPS	26 FPS
ultra	21 FPS	18 FPS

Open Core i3-1000NG4 Open Core i7-2657M

Counter-Strike 2

Counter-Strike 2

League of Legends

Preset	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
1080p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS
4K
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i3-1000NG4 Open Core i7-2657M

League of Legends

League of Legends

Valorant

Preset	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
1080p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS
1440p
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS
4K
low	88 FPS	87 FPS
medium	88 FPS	87 FPS
high	88 FPS	87 FPS
ultra	88 FPS	87 FPS

Open Core i3-1000NG4 Open Core i7-2657M

Valorant

Valorant

Check FPS for your specific build

Technical Specifications

Side-by-side comparison of Core i3-1000NG4 and Core i7-2657M

Core i3-1000NG4

The Core i3-1000NG4 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 18 March 2020 (5 years ago). It is based on the Ice Lake-Y (2020) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 10 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1044. Thermal design power (TDP): 9 Watt. Memory support: LPDDR4-3733. Passmark benchmark score: 3,530 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i7-2657M

The Core i7-2657M is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 3 January 2011 (14 years ago). It is based on the Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 1.6 GHz, with boost up to 2.7 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 32 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1066, DDR3-1333. Passmark benchmark score: 3,491 points. Launch price was $317.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-1000NG4 and Core i7-2657M share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-1000NG4 versus 2.7 GHz on the Core i7-2657M — a 16.9% clock advantage for the Core i3-1000NG4 (base: 1.1 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Core i3-1000NG4 uses the Ice Lake-Y (2020) architecture (10 nm), while the Core i7-2657M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-1000NG4 scores 3,530 against the Core i7-2657M's 3,491 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i3-1000NG4. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-1000NG4 vs 4 MB on the Core i7-2657M.

Feature	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz+19%	2.7 GHz
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	1.6 GHz+45%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	4 MB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	10 nm-69%	32 nm
Architecture	Ice Lake-Y (2020)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	3,530+1%	3,491
Geekbench 6 Single	—	535

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-1000NG4 uses the BGA1044 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2657M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-1000NG4	Core i7-2657M
Socket	BGA1044	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	—	8 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	No
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i3-1000NG4) / VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2657M). The Core i7-2657M includes integrated graphics (HD Graphics 3000), while the Core i3-1000NG4 requires a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-2657M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: Core i7-2657M rivals A6-3420M.