
Core i3-4360T
Popular choices:

Core i5-4400E
Popular choices:
Performance Spectrum - CPU
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.
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 i3-4360T
2014Why buy it
- ✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
- ✅Costs $128 less on MSRP ($138 MSRP vs $266 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 95.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 23.9 vs 12.2 PassMark/$ ($138 MSRP vs $266 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Core i5-4400E
2013Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,251 vs 3,294).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.2 vs 23.9 PassMark/$ ($266 MSRP vs $138 MSRP).
- ❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.
Core i3-4360T
2014Core i5-4400E
2013Why buy it
- ✅+1.3% higher PassMark.
- ✅+33.3% larger total L3 cache (4 MB vs 3 MB).
- ✅Costs $128 less on MSRP ($138 MSRP vs $266 MSRP).
- ✅Delivers 95.3% more PassMark for each dollar spent, at 23.9 vs 12.2 PassMark/$ ($138 MSRP vs $266 MSRP).
- ✅Draws 35W instead of 512W, a 477W reduction.
Why buy it
Trade-offs
- ❌Fewer obvious downsides in this matchup outside of normal market pricing swings.
Trade-offs
- ❌Lower PassMark (3,251 vs 3,294).
- ❌Smaller total L3 cache (3 MB vs 4 MB).
- ❌Lower PassMark per dollar, at 12.2 vs 23.9 PassMark/$ ($266 MSRP vs $138 MSRP).
- ❌1362.9% higher power demand at 512W vs 35W.
Quick Answers
So, is Core i3-4360T better than Core i5-4400E?
Which one is better for streaming, content creation, and heavy multitasking?
Which one is the smarter buy today, not just the cheaper CPU?
Which one is more future-proof for 2026 and beyond?
Games Benchmarks
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.

Path of Exile 2
| Preset | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 81 FPS | 78 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 66 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 64 FPS | 68 FPS |
| medium | 55 FPS | 57 FPS |
| high | 42 FPS | 43 FPS |
| ultra | 33 FPS | 34 FPS |

Counter-Strike 2
| Preset | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 65 FPS | 66 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 78 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 73 FPS | 74 FPS |
| ultra | 56 FPS | 56 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 62 FPS | 66 FPS |
| medium | 57 FPS | 59 FPS |
| high | 40 FPS | 41 FPS |
| ultra | 27 FPS | 28 FPS |

League of Legends
| Preset | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |

Valorant
| Preset | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| 1080p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 1440p | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| 4K | ||
| low | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| medium | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| high | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
| ultra | 82 FPS | 81 FPS |
Technical Specifications
Side-by-side comparison of Core i3-4360T and Core i5-4400E

Core i3-4360T
Core i3-4360T
The Core i3-4360T is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 21 July 2014 (11 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 3.2 GHz, with boost up to 3.2 GHz. L3 cache: 4 MB (total). L2 cache: 256 kB (per core). Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: LGA1150. Thermal design power (TDP): 35 Watt. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,294 points. Launch price was $69.

Core i5-4400E
Core i5-4400E
The Core i5-4400E is manufactured by Intel. It was released in 1 October 2013 (12 years ago). It is based on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture. It features 2 cores and 4 threads. Base frequency is 2.7 GHz, with boost up to 3.3 GHz. L3 cache: 3 MB. L2 cache: 512 kB. Built on 22 nm process technology. Socket: BGA1364. Thermal design power (TDP): 512 kB + 3 MB. Memory support: DDR3. Passmark benchmark score: 3,251 points. Launch price was $266.
Processing Power
Both the Core i3-4360T and Core i5-4400E share an identical 2-core/4-thread configuration. Boost clocks reach 3.2 GHz on the Core i3-4360T versus 3.3 GHz on the Core i5-4400E — a 3.1% clock advantage for the Core i5-4400E (base: 3.2 GHz vs 2.7 GHz). Both are built on the Haswell (2013−2015) architecture using a 22 nm process. In PassMark, the Core i3-4360T scores 3,294 against the Core i5-4400E's 3,251 — a 1.3% lead for the Core i3-4360T. L3 cache: 4 MB (total) on the Core i3-4360T vs 3 MB on the Core i5-4400E.
| Feature | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| Cores / Threads | 2 / 4 | 2 / 4 |
| Boost Clock | 3.2 GHz | 3.3 GHz+3% |
| Base Clock | 3.2 GHz+19% | 2.7 GHz |
| L3 Cache | 4 MB (total)+33% | 3 MB |
| L2 Cache | 256 kB (per core) | 512 kB+100% |
| Process | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Architecture | Haswell (2013−2015) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| PassMark | 3,294+1% | 3,251 |
Memory & Platform
The Core i3-4360T uses the LGA1150 socket (PCIe 3.0), while the Core i5-4400E uses BGA1364 (PCIe 3.0) — making them incompatible on the same motherboard. Both support up to DDR3-1600 memory speed. The Core i3-4360T supports up to 32 GB of RAM compared to 16 GB — 66.7% more capacity for professional workloads. Both feature 2-channel memory with ECC support. Both provide 16 PCIe lanes.
| Feature | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| Socket | LGA1150 | BGA1364 |
| PCIe Generation | PCIe 3.0 | PCIe 3.0 |
| Max RAM Speed | DDR3-1600 | DDR3L-1600 |
| Max RAM Capacity | 32 GB+100% | 16 GB |
| RAM Channels | 2 | 2 |
| ECC Support | Yes | Yes |
| PCIe Lanes | 16 | 16 |
Advanced Features
Neither processor supports overclocking. Both support VT-x, VT-d virtualization. Both include integrated graphics — HD Graphics 4600 (Core i3-4360T) and HD Graphics 4600 (Core i5-4400E) — useful as a fallback for troubleshooting or display output without a dedicated GPU. Primary use case: Core i3-4360T targets Desktop, Core i5-4400E targets Embedded.
| Feature | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| Integrated GPU | Yes | Yes |
| IGPU Model | HD Graphics 4600 | HD Graphics 4600 |
| Unlocked | No | No |
| AVX-512 | No | No |
| Virtualization | VT-x, VT-d | VT-x, VT-d |
| Target Use | Desktop | Embedded |
Value Analysis
The Core i3-4360T launched at $138 MSRP, while the Core i5-4400E debuted at $266. On MSRP ($138 vs $266), the Core i3-4360T is $128 cheaper. In terms of value on MSRP (PassMark points per dollar), the Core i3-4360T delivers 23.9 pts/$ vs 12.2 pts/$ for the Core i5-4400E — making the Core i3-4360T the 64.5% better value option.
| Feature | Core i3-4360T | Core i5-4400E |
|---|---|---|
| MSRP | $138-48% | $266 |
| Performance per Dollar | 23.9+96% | 12.2 |
| Release Date | 2014 | 2013 |
Top Performing CPUs
The most powerful cpus ranked by PassMark CPU Mark benchmark scores.













