Core i3-3250T vs Core i7-3687U

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 i3-3250T vs Core i7-3687U 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 i3-3250T vs Core i7-3687U: Pros, Cons & Final Verdict

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

Core i3-3250T

2013

Why buy it

✅+1.1% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while Core i7-3687U mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.

Core i7-3687U

2013

Why buy it

✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (2,621 vs 2,650).
❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-3250T better than Core i7-3687U?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i7-3687U is ahead with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 38 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-3250T pulls ahead with 1.1% better PassMark. Core i7-3687U also has the bigger cache pool with 33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i3-3250T 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 i3-3250T is the better buy right now. Core i3-3250T comes in at an unclear MSRP at $138 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you 1.1% better PassMark. The compromise is that Core i7-3687U is still the better pure gaming CPU with a 0.6% average FPS lead across 38 shared CPU game tests in our data. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (19.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), so you are getting the faster CPU without taking a value hit on paper.

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

Core i3-3250T makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting 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 i3-3250T vs Core i7-3687U Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-3250T

The Core i3-3250T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 9 June 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3 GHz, with boost up to 3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1155. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3-1333, DDR3-1600. Passmark benchmark score: 2,650 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i7-3687U

The Core i7-3687U is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 8 January 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.1 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256K (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1023. Thermal design power (TDP): 17 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 2,621 points. Launch price was $69.

⚡

Processing Power

Both the Core i3-3250T and Core i7-3687U share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3 GHz on the Core i3-3250T versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i7-3687U — a 9.5% clock advantage for the Core i7-3687U (base: 3 GHz vs 2.1 GHz). Both are built on the Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) architecture using a 22 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i3-3250T scores 2,650 against the Core i7-3687U's 2,621 — a 1.1% lead for the Core i3-3250T. L3 cache: 3 MB (total) on the Core i3-3250T vs 4 MB (total) on the Core i7-3687U.

Feature	Core i3-3250T	Core i7-3687U
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3 GHz	3.3 GHz+10%
Base Clock	3 GHz+43%	2.1 GHz
L3 Cache	3 MB (total)	4 MB (total)+33%
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	256K (per core)
Process	22 nm	22 nm
Architecture	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)	Ivy Bridge (2012−2013)
PassMark	2,650+1%	2,621
Geekbench 6 Single	—	640
Geekbench 6 Multi	—	1,240

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-3250T uses the LGA1155 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-3687U uses BGA1023 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. Both support up to 32 GB of RAM. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes. Chipset compatibility: H61,B75,H77,Z77 (Core i3-3250T) and QM77,QS77 (Core i7-3687U).

Feature	Core i3-3250T	Core i7-3687U
Socket	LGA1155	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0	PCIe 3.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600	DDR3L-1600
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB	32 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	No	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Virtualization: not specified (Core i3-3250T) / VT-x, VT-d (Core i7-3687U). Both include integrated graphics — Intel HD Graphics 2500 (Core i3-3250T) and HD Graphics 4000 (Core i7-3687U) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i7-3687U targets Enthusiast. Direct competitor: Core i7-3687U rivals Ryzen 7 3700U.