Name: Intel Core i3 3120M
Brand: Intel

3.8

▼Worse than 92% of processors

3.7

▼Worse than 93% of processors

4.8

▼Worse than 99% of processors

0.9
Gaming
Gaming
0.9/ 10
✕
What it is
Measures single-core benchmark performance, peak boost clock speeds, and fast L3 cache sizing critical for high frame rates.
When it matters
When you want to play demanding mobile games, 3D titles, or run graphics-intensive apps smoothly.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
30.0%
1.3
PassMark single-core benchmark score
25.0%
1.0
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
20.0%
?
CPU boost clock speed
17.0%
1.3
L3 cache
8.0%
1.0
N. of physical cores
1.3
Video editing
Video editing
1.3/ 10
✕
What it is
Assesses multi-core benchmark throughput, total physical core and thread count, and cache bandwidth for rapid video rendering.
When it matters
When evaluating how effectively this processors meets your specific video editing needs.
Score distribution
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Score components
45.0%
1.0
Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
20.0%
1.0
N. of physical cores
20.0%
2.1
CPU threads
15.0%
1.3
L3 cache

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3 3120M

3.8

Hide

Platform

7.0

Hide

Brand name

Intel

Processor type

CPU socket

Chipset

CPU architecture

Performance

2.9

Hide

N. of physical cores

CPU threads

Threads per core

CPU boost clock speed

N/A

CPU base clock speed

Cache & Architecture

4.2

Hide

Semiconductor size

Foundry

L3 cache

L2 cache

L1 cache

Memory & PCIe

3.7

Hide

DDR memory version

Maximum memory speed

Max memory speed (JEDEC)

Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)

N/A

Maximum memory capacity

Integrated Graphics

6.7

Hide

Integrated graphics

Integrated GPU model

Integrated GPU execution units

Integrated GPU base frequency

Integrated media encoders/decoders

Power & Thermal

6.7

Hide

TDP (Thermal design power)

Base power (PL1)

Boost power (PL2)

Tau (power duration limit)

N/A

Configurable TDP

Intel Core i3 3120M vs the average processor

Why is Intel Core i3 3120M better than the average processor?

Hide

4.7x faster classroom rendering
Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
1,568.83
Category Benchmark
Market range: <97 – >1.3k
This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (1,568.8 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
1,568.83 vs 334.1
10 °C lower CPU temperature
CPU temperature
90 °C
★ Better than 91% of models
Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (90 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
90 °C vs 100 °C
33.3% smaller die size
Die size
118 mm²
▲ Better than 83% of models
Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (118 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
118 mm² vs 177 mm²
41.7% lower boost power
Boost power (PL2)
35 W
▲ Better than 74% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
35 W vs 60 W
27.78x cheaper
Intel Core i3 3120M is cheaper than the average processor (£9 vs £250).
£9 vs £250
90.9% more popular
Intel Core i3 3120M is more popular than the average processor (1.91 vs 1).
1.91 vs 1
22.2% lower base power
Base power (PL1)
35 W
▲ Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
35 W vs 45 W
85.7% higher GPU clock speed
Integrated GPU base frequency
650 MHz
▲ Better than 80% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (650 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
650 MHz vs 350 MHz

27.78x cheaper
Intel Core i3 3120M is cheaper than the average processor (£9 vs £250).
£9 vs £250
90.9% more popular
Intel Core i3 3120M is more popular than the average processor (1.91 vs 1).
1.91 vs 1

4.7x faster classroom rendering
Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
1,568.83
Category Benchmark
Market range: <97 – >1.3k
This processor has a lower Blender Classroom render time than the average processor (1,568.8 vs 334.1). The average processor needs 334.1 for the Blender Classroom test.
1,568.83 vs 334.1

33.3% smaller die size
Die size
118 mm²
▲ Better than 83% of models
Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (118 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
118 mm² vs 177 mm²

85.7% higher GPU clock speed
Integrated GPU base frequency
650 MHz
▲ Better than 80% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has a higher integrated GPU frequency than the average processor (650 MHz vs 350 MHz). The average processor has integrated GPU frequency of 350 MHz.
650 MHz vs 350 MHz

10 °C lower CPU temperature
CPU temperature
90 °C
★ Better than 91% of models
Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
This processor has a lower CPU temperature than the average processor (90 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor runs at a CPU temperature of 100 °C.
90 °C vs 100 °C
41.7% lower boost power
Boost power (PL2)
35 W
▲ Better than 74% of models
Market range: <25 W – >150 W
This processor has a lower boost power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 60 W). The average processor has a boost power draw of 60 W.
35 W vs 60 W
22.2% lower base power
Base power (PL1)
35 W
▲ Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
35 W vs 45 W

Why is Intel Core i3 3120M worse than the average processor?

Hide

91.8% lower multi-core score
Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
398
▼ Worse than 98% of models
Market range: <763 – >14k
This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (398 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
398 vs 4,829
83.8% lower PassMark score
PassMark benchmark result
1,714
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (1,714 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
1,714 vs 10,572.5
4 fewer CPU cores
N. of physical cores
2
▼ Worse than 79% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
2 vs 6
72.9% lower single-core score
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
398
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <561 – >2.7k
This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (398 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
398 vs 1,471
49% weaker single-core performance
PassMark single-core benchmark score
1,274
▼ Worse than 93% of models
Market range: <1.4k – >4k
This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,274 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
1,274 vs 2,500
83.3% larger process node
Semiconductor size
22 nm
▼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
22 nm vs 12 nm
No configurable TDP
Configurable TDP
no
▼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
Less advanced microarchitecture
Microarchitecture codename
Ivy Bridge
▼ Worse than 75% of models
This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake).
Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake

15.8% worse value for money
Intel Core i3 3120M has worse value for money than the average processor (5.67 vs 6.6).
5.67 vs 6.56
67.6% lower user score
User score
4.8/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
▼
▼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
Intel Core i3 3120M
the average processor
Intel Core i3 3120M has a lower user score than the average processor (4.77 vs 8.000).
4.77 vs 8

Narrower instruction support
Instruction sets
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C
▼ Worse than 74% of models
This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, F16C vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
8 years older release date
Release date
2012
▼ Worse than 95% of models
Market range: <2k – >2k
This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2012 vs 2020).
September 2012
2012 vs 2020

91.8% lower multi-core score
Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
398
▼ Worse than 98% of models
Market range: <763 – >14k
This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (398 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
398 vs 4,829
83.8% lower PassMark score
PassMark benchmark result
1,714
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (1,714 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
1,714 vs 10,572.5
4 fewer CPU cores
N. of physical cores
2
▼ Worse than 79% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
2 vs 6
72.9% lower single-core score
Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
398
▼ Worse than 96% of models
Market range: <561 – >2.7k
This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (398 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
398 vs 1,471
49% weaker single-core performance
PassMark single-core benchmark score
1,274
▼ Worse than 93% of models
Market range: <1.4k – >4k
This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,274 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
1,274 vs 2,500
Lower base clock
CPU base clock speed
2 x 2.5 GHz
▼ Worse than 88% of models
This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x2.5 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
2x2.5 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
4 fewer CPU threads
CPU threads
4
▼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
4 vs 8
37.5% lower bus speed
Bus speed
5 GT/s
▼ Worse than 56% of models
Market range: <3 GT/s – >8 GT/s
This processor has a lower bus speed than the average processor (5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor runs at bus speed of 8 GT/s.
5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
37.5% lower bus transfer rate
Bus transfer rate
5 GT/s
▼ Worse than 62% of models
Market range: <4 GT/s – >19 GT/s
This processor has a lower bus transfer rate than the average processor (5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s). The average processor offers bus transfer rate of 8 GT/s.
5 GT/s vs 8 GT/s
No Turbo Boost
Turbo Boost version
no
▼ Worse than 89% of models
This processor does not support Turbo Boost, the average processor does. 88.6% of processors support Turbo Boost.

83.3% larger process node
Semiconductor size
22 nm
▼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (22 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
22 nm vs 12 nm
Less advanced microarchitecture
Microarchitecture codename
Ivy Bridge
▼ Worse than 75% of models
This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake).
Ivy Bridge vs Kaby Lake
80% smaller L2 cache
L2 cache
0.5 MB
▼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
50% less L2 per core
L2 per core
0.25 MB/core
▼ Worse than 63% of models
Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
66.7% smaller L1 cache
L1 cache
128 KB
▼ Worse than 83% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (128 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
128 KB vs 384 KB
62.5% smaller L3 cache
L3 cache
3 MB
▼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (3 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
3 MB vs 8 MB
12.5% less L3 per core
L3 per core
1.5 MB/core
▼ Worse than 54% of models
Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
This processor has less L3 cache per core than the average processor (1.5 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
1.5 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
Less advanced foundry
Foundry
Intel 22 nm
▼ Worse than 85% of models
This processor uses a less advanced foundry process than the average processor (Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm).
Intel 22 nm vs Intel 14 nm

Older DDR support
DDR memory version
DDR3
▼ Worse than 86% of models
This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3 vs DDR4).
DDR3 vs DDR4
44.1% lower memory bandwidth
Maximum memory bandwidth
25.6 GB/s
▼ Worse than 86% of models
Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (25.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
25.6 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
45.4% lower memory speed
Maximum memory speed
1,600 MHz
▼ Worse than 87% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1600 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
1,600 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
Older PCIe version
PCIe version
2.0
▼ Worse than 92% of models
This processor supports an older PCIe version than the average processor (2 vs 3).
2.0 vs 3.0
Lower JEDEC memory speed
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
DDR3-1600 MHz
▼ Worse than 89% of models
This processor has a lower JEDEC memory speed than the average processor (DDR3-1600 MHz vs DDR4-3200 MHz). The average processor supports JEDEC memory speed of DDR4-3200 MHz.
DDR3-1,600 MHz vs DDR4-3,200 MHz
50% less memory capacity
Maximum memory capacity
32 GB
▼ Worse than 72% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
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
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode)
▼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
Inferior integrated GPU
Integrated GPU model
Intel HD Graphics 4000
▼ Worse than 69% of models
This processor uses an inferior integrated GPU to the average processor (Intel HD Graphics 4000 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
Intel HD Graphics 4,000 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630

No configurable TDP
Configurable TDP
no
▼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
10 °C lower TJ Max
Maximum operating temperature (TJ Max)
90 °C
▼ Worse than 92% of models
Market range: <95 °C – >105 °C
This processor has a lower TJ Max than the average processor (90 °C vs 100 °C). The average processor has a TJ Max of 100 °C.
90 °C vs 100 °C

Based on 1 buyer reviews from online shops.

Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

How we calculate this

User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.

Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

openbenchmarking.org

30/09/2013

Summary of the review

Intel Core i3-3120M Benchmarks, Linux Performance - OpenBenchmarking.org

The Intel Core i3-3120M is a 2-core, 4-thread Ivy Bridge mobile processor from 2012 featuring a 2.5 GHz base clock, 3MB L3 cache, and Intel HD Graphics 4000. Based on data from OpenBenchmarking.org, this 22nm CPU serves as a legacy, entry-level unit, generally falling into lower performance percentiles in modern testing. Key advantages include its 35W TDP for power efficiency and solid performance gains over previous generations, showing roughly 31-35% faster single and multi-threaded speeds compared to the i3-2350M. It offers adequate support for basic tasks via AVX, SSE 4.2, and virtualization technologies. Drawbacks are significant, including the lack of Turbo Boost technology and only two physical cores, which severely limits high-load performance. While sufficient for light productivity, it is unsuitable for modern gaming or intensive content creation. See the full dataset at OpenBenchmarking.org.

bild.de

09/07/2013

Review: No one needs more laptop than this (Asus F55A with i3-3120M)

a little longer A July 2013 review by Computer Bild assessed seven Windows notebooks under €650, concluding that this price bracket provides sufficient performance for everyday tasks, making high-end, expensive devices unnecessary for most users. Pros for these budget-friendly models include solid, all-rounder performance for office and home use, often featuring separate numeric keypads and diverse connectivity optionsDismissMore input optionsMicrophoneStopStartSendAsk about

itjustgood.com

12/02/2024

Review & Feedback: Refurbished DELL Latitude 5590/E5530", "DELL Latitude 5590/E5530 Refurbished: Test & Review

The Dell Latitude E5530 is a robust, business-oriented 15.6-inch laptop featuring a durable Tri-Metal chassis with magnesium alloy corners, a 3rd Gen Intel Core i3-3120M processor, 8GB of RAM, and a 320GB hard drive. It is well-equipped with comprehensive connectivity options, including USB 3.0, HDMI, VGA, and a built-in webcam, alongside support for professional docking stations. Key advantages include its sturdy build and comfortable, full-sized keyboard, while disadvantages are its 2.9 kg weight, the aging processor, and limited performance from the integrated graphics, which are unsuitable for heavy tasks. For more details, visit itjustgood.com.

secondgoelectro.nl

Unknown

Intel Core i3-3120M Mobile Processor SR0TX

The Intel Core i3-3120M (SR0TX) is a 2.5 GHz dual-core processor from the Ivy Bridge architecture, utilizing a 22nm process and Socket G2 (rPGA988B) for mobile devices. It features integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000 and 3MB L3 cache, supporting DDR3-1600 memory and Hyper-Threading. Key advantages include solid reliability for basic office tasks, energy efficiency, and moderate multitasking capabilities with a 35W TDP. However, a major limitation is the lack of Turbo Boost, capping performance at 2.5 GHz and making it slower than i5 alternatives. Its aging architecture faces issues with modern gaming, heavy video editing, and it can suffer from thermal throttling. For detailed specifications, you can visit SecondGoElectro's website. Copy

laptopmedia.com

Intel Core i3-3120M - LaptopMedia

The Intel Core i3-3120M is a 22nm Ivy Bridge dual-core mobile processor, operating at a fixed 2.50 GHz with Hyper-Threading for entry-level, 35W TDP notebooks. It lacks Turbo Boost, offering only a 5-10% performance increase over Sandy Bridge predecessors, while providing stable, efficient performance for basic office work and web browsing. The integrated Intel HD Graphics 4000 (16 EUs) marks a significant improvement over the previous generation, enabling capable HD video playback and light, casual gaming. However, the i3-3120M faces limitations due to its legacy status and lack of Turbo Boost, resulting in 10-25% slower performance than i5 models, alongside potential thermal throttling under heavy, sustained loads. While it handles multitasking and everyday tasks effectively, it is not suitable for modern, demanding applications. Overall, it is a reliable but outdated, budget-oriented processor primarily for basic computing needs. For more details on the specifications, visit Intel.

Third-party reviews

Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this

What we like about Intel Core i3 3120M

Capable of handling basic home and office tasks efficiently even years after release
Supports hyper-threading, allowing the dual-core chip to handle four threads for better multitasking
Energy-efficient Ivy Bridge architecture with a relatively low 35W TDP suitable for smaller laptops
Includes Intel HD Graphics 4000, which offers a performance boost over previous generations
Proven durability and reliability in budget-friendly office and desktop systems

What we don't like about Intel Core i3 3120M

Lacks Intel Turbo Boost technology, limiting its ability to increase clock speed under heavy loads
Subject to thermal throttling in some laptops, leading to frame rate drops during sustained gaming
Outdated dual-core performance that struggles with modern AAA gaming or intensive multi-threaded apps
Cannot be undervolted or easily overclocked, limiting performance tuning options
Integrated graphics are insufficient for modern gaming titles and high-end video editing

Intel Core i3 3120M Review | 78 Data compared

Best prices

Best rankings

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3 3120M

Intel Core i3 3120M vs the average processor

Why is Intel Core i3 3120M better than the average processor?

Why is Intel Core i3 3120M worse than the average processor?

Expert reviews

Third-party reviews

What we like about Intel Core i3 3120M

What we don't like about Intel Core i3 3120M

Verdict

Best alternatives

Compare Intel Core i3 3120M with other processors

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i3 3120M and other processors