Scored using Processors Methodology v3.0
Processors Methodology v3.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are scored under Frontum Processors Methodology v3.0: the technical score from the specifications is the base, and independent expert and video reviews (up to ±0.5 points), owner opinions (up to ±0.3) and best-of lists (up to +0.3) move it up or down.
Explore Processors Methodology v3.0

Intel Core i3-1000G1 review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£95PassMark multi-core score:?N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:3.2 GHzCPU socket:FCBGA1377TDP (Thermal design power):9 W

Intel Core i3-1000G1 Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.8/10

Overall score

Score
6.8/ 10
✕
What it is
Our main score for this model, 1–10. It combines specs, expert reviews, best-of lists and owners.
How we count it
Parts: Technical score 40%, Reviews score 25%, List score 25%, Sentiment score 10%
Marks: Each part gets a mark out of 10. For reviews, lists and owners, a typical model in this category gets about 8 and the best one gets 10.
No data yet: A part with no data shows "?". It counts as the mark of a weaker model in this category (4 in 5 models with data score higher). This way, models with reviews, lists and owners usually come out ahead.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

40%

6.1

Technical score

25%

?

Reviews scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.2, the mark of a weaker model in this category

25%

?

List scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.5, the mark of a weaker model in this category

10%

?

Sentiment scoreNot enough data yet, so we use 7.0, the mark of a weaker model in this category

â–²Better than 53% of processors
7.8

Value for money

Value for money
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

10

Price

â–²Better than 77%
6.1

Technical score

Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components

60%

6.0

Performance

18%

5.7

Architecture

10%

5.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.5

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated graphics

â–²Better than 54%
?

Reviews score

Reviews score
✕
What it is
Average grade from independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers, 1–10.
How we count it
Grades: Each review's own score is converted to 1–10; without one, we grade the review ourselves. Big test sites count more, short reviews half as much as full tests. A video review counts half.
Score: The average grade is 80% of the review mark; the number of reviews is the other 20% (1 review = 5, the typical number in this category = 8, the most-reviewed model = 10).
Enough data: With few reviews, the average grade is pulled toward the typical grade of this category. No reviews yet: 7.2 for now.
Share: Reviews count 25% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Grades by review (0)
We have not found an independent test of this model yet. Until we do, its review part counts as 7.2.
User ratings collected online are not part of this score.
No expert tests yet
?

List score

List score
7.5/ 10
✕
What it is
How often independent test sites, magazines and video reviewers put this model in their best-of lists for this category.
How we count it
Points: The model in the most lists of this category gets 10; the others get 8 to 10 in proportion. In no list yet: 7.5. Lists count 25% of the overall score.
Enough data: Every list counts, even a single one. With fewer than 5 best-of lists in the category, this part is left out.
Lists with this model (0)
Not in any best-of list yet, so this part counts as 7.5. Models in a list get 8 to 10.
Not in any best-of list yet
  • No image
No image
Where to buy
    N/A~ £95
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading...
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3-1000G1

Technical score
Technical score
6.1/ 10
✕
What it is
How good the specs are compared with the other models in this category, 1–10.
How we count it
Areas: We rate the specs in each area against the other models in this category.
Weighting: The areas that matter most to buyers count more. The shares are shown under Score components.
Share: The technical score is 40% of the overall score.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

60%

6.0

Performance

18%

5.7

Architecture

10%

5.3

Memory & PCIe

7%

8.2

Power & Thermal

4%

7.5

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated graphics

6.1
Reviews score
7.2
List score
?
Value for money
Value for money
7.8/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components:

70%

6.8

Overall score

30%

10

Price

7.8
Processor type
mobile
This processor belongs to the mobile processor class, which is more advanced than that of 6.9% of processors and equal to that of 47.7% of processors.
CPU socket
FCBGA1377
This processor uses the FCBGA1377 CPU socket, which is older than that of 87.2% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Chipset
N/A
CPU architecture
x86-64
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.8% of processors and equal to that of 98.2% of processors.
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES
This processor supports MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES instruction sets, which is broader support than 51.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.1% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
2
This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 80.4% of processors and equal to 19.6% of processors.
CPU threads
4
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 69% of processors and equal to 25.2% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
3.2 GHz
This processor reaches a boost clock of 3.2 GHz which is lower than that of 90.1% of processors and equal to that of 1.9% of processors.
CPU base clock speed
2x 1.1 GHz
This processor has a base clock of 2x1.1 GHz which is lower than that of 98.6% of processors and equal to that of 0.7% of processors.
PassMark multi-core score
?
Show more
Semiconductor size
10 nm
This processor uses a 10 nm process node, which is more advanced than that of 50.8% of processors and equal to that of 19.5% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 10 nm
This processor is built on the Intel 10 nm foundry process, which is more advanced than that of 51.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.6% of processors.
L3 cache
4 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 4 MB which is smaller than that of 71.7% of processors and equal to that of 13.8% of processors.
L2 cache
0.5 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 0.5 MB which is smaller than that of 85.4% of processors and equal to that of 14.5% of processors.
L1 cache
160 KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 160 KB which is smaller than that of 82.3% of processors and equal to that of 1.5% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR4
This processor supports DDR DDR4, which is newer than that of 25.2% of processors and equal to that of 31.1% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
3,733 MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 3,733 MHz, which is higher than that of 58.4% of processors and equal to 1.1% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
LPDDR4-3733 MHz
This processor supports JEDEC memory speeds up to LPDDR4-3733 MHz, which is higher than that of 55.9% of processors and equal to 0.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
32 GB
This processor supports up to 32 GB of memory, which is less than 73% of processors and equal to 18.9% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
This processor includes integrated graphics. 14.7% of processors offer this.
Intel UHD Graphics
Integrated GPU model
Intel UHD Graphics 32EU
This processor uses the Intel UHD Graphics 32EU integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 60.4% of processors and equal to that in 0.8% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
32
This processor has 32 GPU execution units, which is more than 70.1% of processors and equal to 10.1% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
300 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 300 MHz which is lower than that of 57.8% of processors and equal to that of 38.4% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode)
This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode) media codecs, which is broader support than 66.4% of processors and equal to 1.9% of processors.
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
9 W
This processor has a TDP of 9 W which is lower than that of 95.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
9 W
This processor has a base power of 9 W which is lower than that of 95.4% of processors and equal to that of 1% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
12 W
This processor has a boost power of 12 W which is lower than that of 94.8% of processors and equal to that of 0.6% of processors.
Tau (power duration limit)
28 seconds
This processor has a turbo duration of 28 seconds which is longer than that of 4.4% of processors and equal to that of 85.3% of processors.
Configurable TDP
yes
This processor supports configurable TDP. 46.4% of processors offer this.
cTDP: 8 W
Show more

Intel Core i3-1000G1 vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
  • 80% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 81.3% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (12 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    12 W vs 64 W
  • 80% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 30.5% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (123 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    123 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 24.3% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (58.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    58.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 2.63x cheaper
    Intel Core i3-1000G1 is cheaper than the average processor (£95 vs £250).
    £95 vs £250
  • More advanced microarchitecture
    This processor uses a more advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake).
    Ice Lake vs Kaby Lake
  • 30.5% smaller die size
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (123 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    123 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • More advanced foundry
    This processor uses a more advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
    Intel 10 nm vs Intel 14 nm
  • 8.1% more L3 per core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.85 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.85 MB/core
  • 24.3% higher memory bandwidth
    This processor has a higher memory bandwidth than the average processor (58.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
    58.3 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
  • 80% lower base power
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 81.3% lower boost power
    This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (12 W vs 64 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 64 W.
    12 W vs 64 W
  • 80% lower TDP
    This processor has a lower TDP than the average processor (9 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a TDP of 45 W.
    9 W vs 45 W
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 27.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 fewer performance cores
    This processor has fewer performance cores than the average processor (2 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    2 vs 4
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    0.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 58.3% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (160 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    160 KB vs 384 KB
  • Older CPU socket
    This processor uses an older CPU socket than the average processor (FCBGA1377 vs FP5).
    FCBGA1377 vs FP5
  • Weaker security extensions
    This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK
  • Narrower instruction support
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, AVX-512, F16C, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 27.3% lower boost clock
    This processor has a lower boost clock speed than the average processor (3.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz). The average processor reaches boost clock speed of 4.4 GHz.
    3.2 GHz vs 4.4 GHz
  • Lower base clock
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x1.1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
    2x1.1 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz
  • 2 fewer performance cores
    This processor has fewer performance cores than the average processor (2 vs 4). The average processor has 4 performance cores.
    2 vs 4
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 17 lower clock multiplier
    This processor has a lower clock multiplier than the average processor (11 vs 28). The average processor has a clock multiplier of 28.
    11 vs 28
  • 50% lower bus transfer rate
    This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
    4 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
  • 83.3% smaller L2 cache
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 3 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 3 MB.
    0.5 MB vs 3 MB
  • 58.3% smaller L1 cache
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (160 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    160 KB vs 384 KB
  • 55.6% smaller L3 cache
    This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (4 MB vs 9 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 9 MB.
    4 MB vs 9 MB
  • Limited PCIe bifurcation
    This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
    x4 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4
  • 50% less memory capacity
    This processor has fewer maximum memory capacity than the average processor (32 GB vs 64 GB). The average processor supports 64 GB of memory.
    32 GB vs 64 GB
  • Narrower media codec support
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)

Third-party reviews

What customers like about Intel Core i3-1000G1

  • Energy efficient with a low 9W TDP, suitable for thin laptops and fanless designs
  • Handles basic multitasking and day-to-day office tasks effectively
  • Support for fast LPDDR4-3733 RAM improves overall system responsiveness
  • Budget-friendly option for students and casual users
  • Integrated AI hardware acceleration and native support for Wi-Fi 6

What customers don't like about Intel Core i3-1000G1

  • Limited to only 2 cores and 4 threads, which struggles with modern heavy workloads
  • Weak integrated GPU (UHD Graphics G1) is unsuitable for AAA gaming or intensive video editing
  • Low base clock speed (1.1 GHz) can lead to sluggish performance under sustained stress
  • Poor performance in heavy multitasking or 3D rendering compared to i5 or Ryzen alternatives
  • Thermal throttling can occur quickly in poorly cooled budget laptop chassis

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-1000G1 is a power-efficient dual-core mobile processor from the 10th Gen Ice Lake-U series, built on a 10nm process. It features 2 cores and 4 threads via Hyper-Threading, with a base clock of 1.1 GHz and a turbo boost up to 3.2 GHz. Key characteristics include an ultra-low 9W TDP, 4MB of L3 cache, and integrated UHD Graphics G1 (32 execution units). Its main pros are extreme energy efficiency for thin laptops or tablets, high RAM speed support up to LPDDR4-3733, and integrated AI hardware acceleration. However, its primary cons are its limited multi-core performance, making it unsuitable for heavy multitasking, and a weak integrated GPU that struggles with modern gaming or intensive graphical tasks.

Compare Intel Core i3-1000G1 with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i3-1000G1 and other processors

No results found