Core i7-12700F vs Core i3-3240
Aggregate performance score
i7-12700F outperforms i3-3240 by a whopping 1222% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 2101 | 273 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.62 | 37.97 |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Desktop processor |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Alder Lake (2022) |
| Release date | 3 September 2012 (11 years ago) | 4 January 2022 (2 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $75 | $386 |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
i7-12700F has 1349% better value for money than i3-3240.
Detailed specifications
Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F basic parameters such as number of cores, number of threads, base frequency and turbo boost clock, lithography, cache size and multiplier lock state. These parameters indirectly say of CPU speed, though for more precise assessment you have to consider their test results.
| Physical cores | 2 (Dual-core) | 12 (Dodeca-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Base clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 4.9 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 1 MB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 12 MB |
| L3 cache | 3 MB (shared) | 25 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 94 mm2 | 215 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F compatibility with other computer components: motherboard (look for socket type), power supply unit (look for power consumption) etc. Useful when planning a future computer configuration or upgrading an existing one. Note that power consumption of some processors can well exceed their nominal TDP, even without overclocking. Some can even double their declared thermals given that the motherboard allows to tune the CPU power parameters.
| Number of CPUs in a configuration | 1 | 1 |
| Socket | 1155 | LGA 1700 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | no data | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| TSX | no data | + |
Security technologies
Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | + |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F are enumerated here.
| VT-d | no data | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR4, DDR5 Dual-channel |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 76.8 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | no data |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD 2500 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 5.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 20 |
Synthetic benchmark performance
Various benchmark results of the processors in comparison. Overall score is measured in points in 0-100 range, higher is better.
Combined synthetic benchmark score
This is our combined benchmark performance rating. We are regularly improving our combining algorithms, but if you find some perceived inconsistencies, feel free to speak up in comments section, we usually fix problems quickly.
Passmark
Passmark CPU Mark is a widespread benchmark, consisting of 8 different types of workload, including integer and floating point math, extended instructions, compression, encryption and physics calculation. There is also one separate single-threaded scenario measuring single-core performance.
GeekBench 5 Single-Core
GeekBench 5 Single-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses only a single CPU core.
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core
GeekBench 5 Multi-Core is a cross-platform application developed in the form of CPU tests that independently recreate certain real-world tasks with which to accurately measure performance. This version uses all available CPU cores.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 1.50 | 19.83 |
| Recency | 3 September 2012 | 4 January 2022 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 12 |
| Threads | 4 | 20 |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 55 Watt | 65 Watt |
i3-3240 has 18.2% lower power consumption.
i7-12700F, on the other hand, has a 1222% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 9 years, 500% more physical cores and 400% more threads, and a 120% more advanced lithography process.
The Core i7-12700F is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-3240 in performance tests.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-3240 and Core i7-12700F, ask them in Comments section, and we shall answer.
Similar processor comparisons
We picked several similar comparisons of processors in the same market segment and performance relatively close to those reviewed on this page.
