Core i3-4330 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 i3-4330 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 i3-4330 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 i3-4330

2013

Why buy it

✅Better for gaming: +10.1% higher average FPS across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Trade-offs

❌Lower PassMark (3,482 vs 3,491).
❌Launch MSRP is still $138 MSRP, while Core i7-2657M mostly shows up through inconsistent older-market listings.
❌217.6% higher power demand at 54W vs 17W.

Core i7-2657M

2011

Why buy it

✅+0.3% higher PassMark.
✅Draws 17W instead of 54W, a 37W reduction.

Trade-offs

❌Worse for gaming: lower average FPS than Core i3-4330 across 50 shared CPU benchmark tests.

Quick Answers

So, is Core i3-4330 better than Core i7-2657M?

It depends on what you want from the system. For gaming, Core i3-4330 is ahead with a 10.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. For rendering, compiling, streaming, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2657M pulls ahead with 0.3% better PassMark.

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

For streaming, content creation, and heavier multitasking, Core i7-2657M is the stronger fit. You are getting 0.3% better PassMark, backed by 2 cores and 4 threads.

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

Core i3-4330 is the better buy right now. Core i3-4330 comes in at an unclear MSRP at $138 MSRP versus unclear MSRP, and it still gives you a 10.1% average FPS lead across 50 shared CPU game tests in our data. The compromise is that Core i7-2657M is still stronger for heavier multi-core work with 0.3% better PassMark. It is also 100.0% better value on MSRP (25.2 vs 0.0 PassMark/$), 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 i3-4330 makes more sense long term for 2026 and beyond. You are getting a newer CPU generation (2013 vs 2011). That makes it the safer long-term bet.

Core i3-4330 vs Core i7-2657M Technical Specifications

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

Core i3-4330

The Core i3-4330 is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 September 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.5 GHz, with boost up to 3.5 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 54 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,482 points. Launch price was $171.

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 i3-4330 and Core i7-2657M share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.5 GHz on the Core i3-4330 versus 2.7 GHz on the Core i7-2657M — a 25.8% clock advantage for the Core i3-4330 (base: 3.5 GHz vs 1.6 GHz). The Core i3-4330 uses the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture (22 nm), while the Core i7-2657M uses Sandy Bridge (2011−2013) (32 nm). In PassMark, the Core i3-4330 scores 3,482 against the Core i7-2657M's 3,491 — a 0.3% lead for the Core i7-2657M. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4330 vs 4 MB on the Core i7-2657M.

Feature	Core i3-4330	Core i7-2657M
Cores / Threads	2 / 4	2 / 4
Boost Clock	3.5 GHz+30%	2.7 GHz
Base Clock	3.5 GHz+119%	1.6 GHz
L3 Cache	4 MB (total)	4 MB
L2 Cache	256 kB (per core)	512 kB+100%
Process	22 nm-31%	32 nm
Architecture	Haswell (2013−2015)	Sandy Bridge (2011−2013)
PassMark	3,482	3,491
Geekbench 6 Single	—	535

🧠

Memory & Platform

The Core i3-4330 uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i7-2657M uses BGA1023 (PCIe 2.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Maximum memory speed reaches DDR3-1600 on the Core i3-4330 versus DDR3-1333 on the Core i7-2657M — the Core i3-4330 supports 20% faster memory, which can translate to measurable gains in memory-sensitive workloads. The Core i3-4330 supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 8 GB — 300% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.

Feature	Core i3-4330	Core i7-2657M
Socket	LGA1150	BGA1023
PCIe Generation	PCIe 3.0+50%	PCIe 2.0
Max RAM Speed	DDR3-1600+20%	DDR3-1333
Max RAM Capacity	32 GB+300%	8 GB
RAM Channels	2	2
ECC Support	Yes	No
PCIe Lanes	16	16

🔧

Advanced Features

Neither processor supports overclocking. Virtualization support: VT-x, VT-d (Core i3-4330) vs VT-x, VT-d, EPT (Core i7-2657M). Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4330) and HD Graphics 3000 (Core i7-2657M) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4330 targets Desktop, Core i7-2657M targets Ultrabook. Direct competitor: Core i7-2657M rivals A6-3420M.

Feature	Core i3-4330	Core i7-2657M
Integrated GPU	Yes	Yes
IGPU Model	HD Graphics 4600	HD Graphics 3000
Unlocked	No	No
AVX-512	No	No
Virtualization	VT-x, VT-d	VT-x, VT-d, EPT
Target Use	Desktop	Ultrabook