Processor N95 vs i3-6320
Aggregate performance score
Processor N95 outperforms Core i3-6320 by a moderate 12% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in the ranking | 1668 | 1605 |
| Place by popularity | not in top-100 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 0.55 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | Intel Core i3 | Intel Alder Lake-N |
| Power efficiency | 5.22 | 19.88 |
| Architecture codename | Skylake (2015−2016) | Alder Lake-N (2023) |
| Release date | 1 September 2015 (9 years ago) | 3 January 2023 (1 year ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $157 | no data |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 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) | 4 (Quad-Core) |
| Threads | 4 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 0.1 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.4 GHz |
| Bus type | DMI 3.0 | no data |
| Bus rate | 4 × 8 GT/s | no data |
| Multiplier | 39 | no data |
| L1 cache | 128 KB | 96 KB (per core) |
| L2 cache | 512 KB | 2 MB (shared) |
| L3 cache | 4 MB (shared) | 6 MB (shared) |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Die size | 98.57 mm2 | no data |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 105 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 65 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | no data |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | + |
Compatibility
Information on Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 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 (Uniprocessor) | 1 |
| Socket | FCLGA1151 | Intel BGA 1264 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 15 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| Instruction set extensions | Intel® SSE4.1, Intel® SSE4.2, Intel® AVX2 | no data |
| AES-NI | + | + |
| FMA | - | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | + |
| Turbo Boost Technology | - | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | no data |
| Idle States | + | no data |
| Thermal Monitoring | + | - |
Security technologies
Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | - | + |
| EDB | + | no data |
| Secure Key | + | no data |
| MPX | + | - |
| Identity Protection | + | - |
| SGX | Yes with Intel® ME | no data |
| OS Guard | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 are enumerated here.
| VT-d | + | + |
| VT-x | + | + |
| EPT | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR4 | DDR4, DDR5 |
| Maximum memory size | 64 GB | no data |
| Max memory channels | 2 | no data |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 34.134 GB/s | no data |
| ECC memory support | + | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card Compare | Intel HD Graphics 530 | Intel UHD Graphics Xe 16EUs (Tiger Lake-H) |
| Max video memory | 64 GB | no data |
| Quick Sync Video | + | - |
| Clear Video | + | no data |
| Clear Video HD | + | no data |
| Graphics max frequency | 1.15 GHz | no data |
| InTru 3D | + | no data |
Graphics interfaces
Available interfaces and connections of Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 integrated GPUs.
| Number of displays supported | 3 | no data |
| eDP | + | no data |
| DisplayPort | + | - |
| HDMI | + | - |
| DVI | + | no data |
Graphics image quality
Maximum display resolutions supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 integrated GPUs, including resolutions over different interfaces.
| 4K resolution support | + | no data |
| Max resolution over HDMI 1.4 | 4096x2304@24Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over eDP | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over DisplayPort | 4096x2304@60Hz | no data |
| Max resolution over VGA | N/A | no data |
Graphics API support
APIs supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95 integrated GPUs, sometimes API versions are included.
| DirectX | 12 | no data |
| OpenGL | 4.5 | no data |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i3-6320 and Processor N95.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | 3.0 |
| PCI Express lanes | 16 | 9 |
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 2.92 | 3.27 |
| Integrated graphics card | 2.59 | 2.29 |
| Recency | 1 September 2015 | 3 January 2023 |
| Physical cores | 2 | 4 |
| Chip lithography | 14 nm | 10 nm |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 51 Watt | 15 Watt |
i3-6320 has 13.1% faster integrated GPU.
Processor N95, on the other hand, has a 12% higher aggregate performance score, an age advantage of 7 years, 100% more physical cores, a 40% more advanced lithography process, and 240% lower power consumption.
The Processor N95 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i3-6320 in performance tests.
Note that Core i3-6320 is a desktop processor while Processor N95 is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i3-6320 and Processor N95, 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.
