Core i3-1000NG4 vs Phenom II X6 1075T

Core i3-1000NG4 vs Phenom II X6 1075T Performance Spectrum

Core i3-1000NG4

2 / 4

3,530

+0.9%

Core i7-620M

Core 2 Duo T6670

Celeron Dual-Core T1400

3,500

0.0%

Ryzen Threadripper 3990X

About PassMark

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 Phenom II X6 1075T 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 Phenom II X6 1075T: 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

✅+0.9% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 9W instead of 125W, a 116W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (4 MB vs 6 MB).
❌No boxed cooler included, unlike Phenom II X6 1075T.

Phenom II X6 1075T

2010

Why buy it

✅+50% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 4 MB).
✅100+% more PCIe lanes (16 vs 0) for storage and expansion-heavy builds.
✅Includes a boxed cooler (Yes), unlike Core i3-1000NG4.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,500 vs 3,530).
❌Launch MSRP is still $245 MSRP, while Core i3-1000NG4 mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌1288.9% higher power demand at 125W vs 9W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-1000NG4 better than Phenom II X6 1075T?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Phenom II X6 1075T is ahead with a 2.2% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-1000NG4 pulls ahead with 0.9% better PassMark. Phenom II X6 1075T also has the bigger cache pool with 50% larger total L3 cache (6 MB vs 4 MB).

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 0.9% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-1000NG4 is still the much better call for a fresh build. Core i3-1000NG4 comes in at an unclear MSRP at unclear MSRP versus $245 MSRP, and it still gives you 0.9% better PassMark. Phenom II X6 1075T only looks stronger on raw value math because it is extremely cheap, but that usually means used-market pricing on an obsolete 2010 platform. Even with 100.0% better value on paper (14.3 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), it really only makes sense as a cheap stopgap or a niche existing-platform option for someone already on AM3.

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 2010) and more multi-core headroom with 2 cores / 4 threads instead of 6/6. That extra compute headroom is more likely to matter as games, background tasks, and creator workloads get heavier.

Core i3-1000NG4 vs Phenom II X6 1075T 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.

Phenom II X6 1075T

The Phenom II X6 1075T is manufactured by AMD. It was released in 21 September 2010 (15 years ago). It is based on the Thuban (2010) architecture. It features 6 cores and 6 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 6 MB (total). L2 cache: 512 kB (per core). Built on 45 nm process technology. Socket: AM3. Thermal design power (TDP): 125 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,500 points. Launch price was $260.

⚡

Processing Power

The Core i3-1000NG4 packs 2 cores / 4 threads, while the Phenom II X6 1075T offers 6 cores / 6 threads — the Phenom II X6 1075T has 4 more cores. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-1000NG4 versus 3.5 GHz on the Phenom II X6 1075T — a 9% clock advantage for the Phenom II X6 1075T (base: 1.1 GHz vs 3 GHz). The Core i3-1000NG4 uses the Ice Lake-Y (2020) architecture (10 nm), while the Phenom II X6 1075T uses Thuban (2010) (45 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-1000NG4 scores 3,530 against the Phenom II X6 1075T's 3,500 — a 0.9% lead for the Core i3-1000NG4. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-1000NG4 vs 6 MB (total) on the Phenom II X6 1075T.

Feature	Core i3-1000NG4	Phenom II X6 1075T
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	6 / 6+200%
Boost Clock	3.2 GHz	3.5 GHz+9%
Base Clock	1.1 GHz	3 GHz+173%
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	6 MB (total)+50%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB (per core)+100%
Process	10 nm-78%	45 nm
Architecture	Ice Lake-Y (2020)	Thuban (2010)
PassMark	3,530	3,500
Cinebench R23 Multi	—	1,896
Geekbench 6 Single	—	679
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,960

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-1000NG4 uses the BGA1044 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Phenom II X6 1075T uses AM3 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard.

Feature	Core i3-1000NG4	Phenom II X6 1075T
Socket	BGA1044	AM3
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	—	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	—	32 GB
RAM Channels	—	2
ECC Support	—	Yes
PCIe Lanes	—	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i3-1000NG4) / AMD-V (Phenom II X6 1075T). Primary use case: Phenom II X6 1075T targets Gaming. Direct competitor: Phenom II X6 1075T rivals Core i5-750.