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.

Core i3-1000NG4 vs Core i7-2657M FPS Benchmarks

Predicted gaming performance across popular games. Tested paired with GeForce RTX 5090 to isolate CPU performance.

Search any supported game below to compare 1080p FPS for both components.

Core i3-1000NG4 vs Core i7-2657M: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

See where each CPU makes more sense in practice: gaming, heavier work, platform cost, power draw, and upgrade path.

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.

Quick Answers

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

Yes. Core i3-1000NG4 is the better all-around CPU here. It gives you a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data, 1.1% better PassMark, and the stronger long-term platform, which is enough to make it the stronger overall pick.

Which one is better for gaming?

If gaming is the priority, Core i3-1000NG4 is the better pick. According to our tests, it delivers 2.7% more average FPS across 50 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 stronger 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 makes the most sense overall. Core i3-1000NG4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 2.7% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data.

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

Core i3-1000NG4 makes more sense long term 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 is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-1000NG4 vs Core i7-2657M Technical Specifications

Side-by-side specs, architecture details, clocks, memory, power, and platform differences.

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.