OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
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 i3-4340TE review: 74 specs compared

Avg. price:~£110PassMark multi-core score:4557N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:?CPU socket:LGA1150TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i3-4340TE Review: Compare 74 technical specifications to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

6.4/10

Overall score

Score
6.4/ 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
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Score components

40%

5.1

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–¼Worse than 59% of processors
7.5

Value for money

Value for money
7.5/ 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
â–² Better than 60% of models
Score components

70%

6.4

Overall score

30%

9.9

Price

â–²Better than 60%
5.1

Technical score

Technical score
5.1/ 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
â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
Score components

60%

5.0

Performance

18%

4.0

Architecture

10%

4.7

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.2

Platform

1%

6.5

Integrated graphics

â–¼Worse than 59%
?

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~ £110
Best rankings
Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
    Loading category ranking...

    Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3-4340TE

    Technical score
    Technical score
    5.1/ 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
    â–¼ Worse than 59% of models
    Score components:

    60%

    5.0

    Performance

    18%

    4.0

    Architecture

    10%

    4.7

    Memory & PCIe

    7%

    7.6

    Power & Thermal

    4%

    7.2

    Platform

    1%

    6.5

    Integrated graphics

    5.1
    Reviews score
    7.2
    List score
    ?
    Value for money
    Value for money
    7.5/ 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
    â–² Better than 60% of models
    Score components:

    70%

    6.4

    Overall score

    30%

    9.9

    Price

    7.5
    Processor type
    embedded
    This processor belongs to the embedded processor class, which is less advanced than that of 93.1% of processors and equal to that of 6.9% of processors.
    CPU socket
    LGA1150
    This processor uses the LGA1150 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 55.3% of processors and equal to that of 2.7% of processors.
    Chipset
    H97, Z97, H87, Q87, B85, Q85, Z87, H81
    This processor supports H97, Z97, H87, Q87, B85, Q85, Z87, H81 chipsets, which is broader compatibility than 52.5% of processors and equal to that of 2.4% of processors.
    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, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2
    This processor supports MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 instruction sets, which is narrower support than 64.5% of processors and equal to that of 0.4% of processors.
    Show more
    N. of physical cores
    2
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 80.4% of processors and equal to 19.6% of processors.
    CPU threads
    4
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 69% of processors and equal to 25.2% of processors.
    CPU boost clock speed
    ?
    CPU base clock speed
    2x 2.6 GHz
    This processor has a base clock of 2x2.6 GHz which is lower than that of 87.3% of processors and equal to that of 0.9% of processors.
    PassMark multi-core score
    4,557
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor scores 4,557 in PassMark, which is lower than 75.3% of processors.
    Show more
    Semiconductor size
    22 nm
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor uses a 22 nm process node, which is older than that of 85% of processors and equal to that of 9.6% of processors.
    Foundry
    Intel 22 nm
    This processor is built on the Intel 22 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 84.9% of processors and equal to that of 9.8% of processors.
    L3 cache
    4 MB
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 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
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 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
    128 KB
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has an L1 cache of 128 KB which is smaller than that of 83.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.3% of processors.
    Show more
    DDR memory version
    DDR3
    This processor supports DDR DDR3, which is older than that of 86.7% of processors and equal to that of 13.3% of processors.
    Maximum memory speed
    1,600 MHz
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor supports memory speeds up to 1,600 MHz, which is lower than that of 87.7% of processors and equal to 10.8% of processors.
    Max memory speed (JEDEC)
    ?
    Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
    ?
    Maximum memory capacity
    32 GB
    Market range: <32 GB – >256 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 HD Graphics 4,600
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel HD Graphics 4600
    This processor uses the Intel HD Graphics 4600 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 64% of processors and equal to that in 2.9% of processors.
    Integrated GPU execution units
    20
    Market range: <6 – >64
    This processor has 20 GPU execution units, which is fewer than 51.6% of processors and equal to 4.3% of processors.
    Integrated GPU base frequency
    350 MHz
    Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
    This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.7% of processors and equal to that of 25.4% of processors.
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode)
    This processor supports H.264 (HW decode/encode), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) media codecs, which is broader support than 52.7% of processors and equal to 0.8% of processors.
    Show more
    TDP (Thermal design power)
    35 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.2% of processors and equal to that of 14% of processors.
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 53.3% of processors and equal to that of 14.1% of processors.
    Boost power (PL2)
    ?
    Tau (power duration limit)
    N/A
    Configurable TDP
    no
    This processor does not support configurable TDP. 53.7% of processors offer this.
    Show more

    Intel Core i3-4340TE vs the average processor

    246810TotalPlatformPerformanceArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated graphicsPower & Thermal
    • 3.09x faster Blender rendering
      This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (1,230.6 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
      1,230.56 vs 398.015
    • Includes a cooler
      This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
    • Supports ECC memory
      This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
    • 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
    • 22.2% lower base power
      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
    • 3.09x faster Blender rendering
      This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (1,230.6 vs 398). The average processor needs 398.015 for the Blender BMW27 test.
      1,230.56 vs 398.015
    • 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
    • Supports ECC memory
      This processor supports ECC memory, while the average processor does not. 32% of processors support it.
    • Includes a cooler
      This processor includes a cooler, while the average processor does not. 26.9% of processors include a cooler.
    • 22.2% lower base power
      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
    • 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
    • 38.4% weaker single-core performance
      This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,575 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      1,575 vs 2,558
    • 60.3% lower PassMark score
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (4,557 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      4,557 vs 11,469
    • 83.3% larger process node
      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
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.
    • Lower base clock
      This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
      2x2.6 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
    • Weaker security extensions
      This processor provides less advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS Guard vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, TXT, OS Guard, Boot Guard, CET, MBEC, TME, TME-MK).
      AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, TXT, OS 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, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V).
      MMX, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, BMI1, BMI2 vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA, AMD-V
    • 6 years older release date
      This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2014 vs 2020).
      May 2014
      2014 vs 2020
    • More limited crypto acceleration
      This processor offers more limited crypto acceleration than the average processor (AES vs AES, SHA).
      AES vs AES, SHA
    • 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
    • 38.4% weaker single-core performance
      This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1,575 vs 2,558). The average processor scores 2,558 in PassMark single-core.
      1,575 vs 2,558
    • 60.3% lower PassMark score
      This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (4,557 vs 11,469). The average processor scores 11,469 in PassMark benchmark.
      4,557 vs 11,469
    • Lower base clock
      This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x2.6 GHz vs 4x3.4 GHz).
      2x2.6 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
    • No speed boosting
      This processor does not support automatic speed boosting, while the average processor does. 87.7% of processors offer this.
    • 37.5% lower bus transfer rate
      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
    • 83.3% larger process node
      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
    • 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
    • 50% less L2 per 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
    • Less advanced microarchitecture
      This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Haswell vs Kaby Lake).
      Haswell vs Kaby Lake
    • 66.7% smaller L1 cache
      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
    • 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
    • 71.7% fewer transistors
      This processor has fewer transistors than the average processor (1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
      1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion
    • Less advanced foundry
      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
    • 50% lower memory speed
      This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (1,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 3,200 MHz.
      1,600 MHz vs 3,200 MHz
    • 45.4% lower memory bandwidth
      This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (25.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 46.9 GB/s.
      25.6 GB/s vs 46.9 GB/s
    • Older DDR support
      This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3 vs DDR4).
      DDR3 vs DDR4
    • Limited PCIe bifurcation
      This processor supports less flexible PCIe bifurcation than the average processor (x16, x8/x8 vs x16, x8/x8, x4/x4/x4/x4).
      x16, x8/x8 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), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) 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), MPEG-2 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode) vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decode/encode)
    • No configurable TDP
      This processor does not support configurable TDP, while the average processor does. 53.7% of processors support configurable TDP.

    Third-party reviews

    What customers like about Intel Core i3-4340TE

    • Extremely energy-efficient with a low 35W Thermal Design Power (TDP), making it ideal for low-power and embedded systems.
    • Integrated Intel HD Graphics 4600 is reliable for basic multimedia, web browsing, and light office tasks.
    • Supports Error-Correcting Code (ECC) memory, which is a rare and valuable feature for budget server or workstation stability.
    • Strong single-core performance compared to older generations, capable of handling day-to-day productivity smoothly.
    • Operates at very low temperatures and is known for its long-lasting reliability in compact systems.

    What customers don't like about Intel Core i3-4340TE

    • Dual-core architecture is outdated for modern multitasking and intensive multi-threaded applications.
    • Poor performance in modern AAA gaming, with frequent stuttering and low frame rates in newer titles.
    • Lacks overclocking capabilities and Turbo Boost technology (fixed at 2.6 GHz), limiting potential performance gains.
    • Does not support Windows 11 natively, which restricts long-term software compatibility and security updates.
    • Performance is significantly lower than Core i5 models from the same generation for a relatively small cost difference.

    Verdict

    The Intel Core i3-4340TE is a 4th Generation 'Haswell' dual-core embedded processor featuring 4 threads via Hyper-Threading, a 2.60 GHz base frequency, and 4 MB of Intel Smart Cache. Built on a 22 nm lithography for the FCLGA1150 socket, it includes integrated Intel HD Graphics 4600 and supports up to 32 GB of DDR3-1333/1600 memory with ECC support. Its primary advantages are an exceptionally low 35W TDP and a relatively high maximum operating temperature of 72°C, making it ideal for energy-efficient or thermally constrained embedded systems. However, its main drawbacks include a locked multiplier that prevents overclocking, the lack of Intel Turbo Boost technology, and limited performance for modern multi-threaded applications compared to newer or higher-tier i5 and i7 models.

    Compare Intel Core i3-4340TE 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 i3-4340TE and other processors

    No results found