Core i5-4340M vs Core i7-3770
Aggregate performance score
i7-3770 outperforms i5-4340M by an impressive 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
Primary details
Comparing Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M processor market type (desktop or notebook), architecture, sales start time and price.
| Place in performance ranking | 1330 | 1769 |
| Place by popularity | 14 | not in top-100 |
| Cost-effectiveness evaluation | 2.97 | no data |
| Market segment | Desktop processor | Laptop |
| Series | no data | Intel Core i5 |
| Architecture codename | Ivy Bridge (2012−2013) | Haswell (2013−2015) |
| Release date | 8 April 2012 (12 years ago) | 19 January 2014 (10 years ago) |
| Launch price (MSRP) | $294 | $266 |
| Current price | $95 (0.3x MSRP) | $200 (0.8x MSRP) |
Cost-effectiveness evaluation
Performance per price, higher is better.
Detailed specifications
Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M 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 | 4 (Quad-Core) | 2 (Dual-core) |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Base clock speed | 3.4 GHz | 2.9 GHz |
| Boost clock speed | 3.9 GHz | 3.6 GHz |
| L1 cache | 64 KB (per core) | 128 KB |
| L2 cache | 256 KB (per core) | 512 KB |
| L3 cache | 8 MB | 3 MB |
| Chip lithography | 22 nm | 22 nm |
| Die size | 160 mm2 | 130 mm2 |
| Maximum core temperature | no data | 100 °C |
| Maximum case temperature (TCase) | 67 °C | no data |
| Number of transistors | 1,400 million | 960 Million |
| 64 bit support | + | + |
| Windows 11 compatibility | - | - |
| Unlocked multiplier | No | No |
Compatibility
Information on Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M 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 | rPGA |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 77 Watt | 37 Watt |
Technologies and extensions
Technological solutions and additional instructions supported by Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M. You'll probably need this information if you require some particular technology.
| AES-NI | + | + |
| AVX | + | + |
| vPro | no data | + |
| Enhanced SpeedStep (EIST) | + | no data |
| Hyper-Threading Technology | + | + |
Security technologies
Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M technologies aimed at improving security, for example, by protecting against hacks.
| TXT | + | no data |
Virtualization technologies
Virtual machine speed-up technologies supported by Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M are enumerated here.
| AMD-V | no data | + |
| VT-d | + | no data |
| VT-x | + | no data |
Memory specs
Types, maximum amount and channel quantity of RAM supported by Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M. Depending on the motherboard, higher memory frequencies may be supported.
| Supported memory types | DDR3 | DDR3 |
| Maximum memory bandwidth | 25.6 GB/s | 25.6 GB/s |
| ECC memory support | - | - |
Graphics specifications
General parameters of integrated GPUs, if any.
| Integrated graphics card | Intel HD 4000 | Intel HD Graphics 4600 |
Peripherals
Specifications and connection of peripherals supported by Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M.
| PCIe version | 3.0 | no data |
| PCI Express lanes | no data | 16 |
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.
Core i7-3770 outperforms Core i5-4340M by 90% based on our aggregate benchmark results.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 68%
Core i7-3770 outperforms Core i5-4340M by 90% in Passmark.
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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i5-4340M outperforms Core i7-3770 by 45% in GeekBench 5 Single-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.
Benchmark coverage: 42%
Core i7-3770 outperforms Core i5-4340M by 24% in GeekBench 5 Multi-Core.
Pros & cons summary
| Performance score | 4.15 | 2.18 |
| Recency | 8 April 2012 | 19 January 2014 |
| Physical cores | 4 | 2 |
| Threads | 8 | 4 |
| Cost | $294 | $266 |
| Power consumption (TDP) | 77 Watt | 37 Watt |
i7-3770 has a 90.4% higher aggregate performance score, and 100% more physical cores and 100% more threads.
i5-4340M, on the other hand, has an age advantage of 1 year, its recommended price lower by $28, and 108.1% lower power consumption.
The Core i7-3770 is our recommended choice as it beats the Core i5-4340M in performance tests.
Note that Core i7-3770 is a desktop processor while Core i5-4340M is a notebook one.
Should you still have questions on choice between Core i7-3770 and Core i5-4340M, 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.
