If fuel cost matters most
Mazda CX-5 with up to 38 MPG combined.
Side-by-side verified model comparison
Mazda CX-5 vs BMW X3
Mazda CX-5 and BMW X3 answer the same shopping question from different directions. The CX-5 is more efficient on verified EPA data, while the X3 reaches the higher power peak. Use the table below to decide whether your priority is fuel cost, safety, size or outright output.
At a glance
| Metric | Mazda CX-5 | BMW X3 |
|---|---|---|
| Production coverage | 2012 - present | 2003 - present |
| Verified generations | 2 | 2 |
| Peak power | 194 hp | 382 hp |
| Best EPA combined | 38 MPG | 25 MPG |
| Latest NHTSA overall | 5★ | NR |
| Open recalls (2017/2024) | 1 | 3 |
| Latest dimensions | 4550 × 1840 × 1675 mm | 4708 × 1891 × 1676 mm |
| Average curb weight | 1622 kg (3576 lbs) | 1958 kg (4317 lbs) |
| Fuel types | Petrol, Diesel | Petrol, Plug-in Hybrid |
If power matters most
BMW X3 with a verified peak of 382 hp.
If safety is the filter
The available data is incomplete, so use the side-by-side table rather than a one-line verdict.
Advertisement
Head-to-Head: Base Model Specifications
A detailed side-by-side comparison of the entry-level powertrain for the newest verified generation of each model. This shows exactly what you get before adding options or stepping up to premium trims.
| Specification | Mazda CX-5CX-5 II 2.0 SKYACTIV-G | BMW X3X3 III (G01) xDrive30i 2.0L Turbo |
|---|---|---|
| Engine & Performance | ||
| Engine Type | Petrol | Petrol |
| Cylinders / Configuration | I4 | I4 |
| Displacement | 2.0L (1998 cc) | 2.0L (1998 cc) |
| Aspiration | Naturally aspirated | Turbocharged |
| Horsepower | 165 hp | 248 hp |
| Torque | 213 Nm | 350 Nm |
| 0-100 km/h (0-62 mph) | 9.1 s | 6.0 s |
| Top Speed | 193 km/h | 210 km/h |
| Transmission & Drivetrain | ||
| Transmission | Automatic | 8-Speed Steptronic Automatic |
| Gears | 6 | — |
| Drivetrain | FWD | AWD |
| Fuel Economy & Range | ||
| City MPG (EPA) | 28.0 MPG | 21.0 MPG |
| Highway MPG (EPA) | 37.0 MPG | 28.0 MPG |
| Combined MPG (EPA) | 32.0 MPG | 24.0 MPG |
| Electric Range | — | — |
| Battery Capacity | — | — |
| CO₂ Emissions | 148 g/km | — |
| Dimensions & Utility | ||
| Length | 4550 mm | 4708 mm |
| Width | 1840 mm | 1891 mm |
| Height | 1675 mm | 1676 mm |
| Wheelbase | 2700 mm | 2864 mm |
| Curb Weight | 1505 kg | 1860 kg |
| Doors / Seats | 4 / 5 | 5 / 5 |
What search winners do that generic comparisons don’t
The top-ranking comparison pages win because they answer an explicit buying job: which one is more efficient, which one is safer, which one is larger, which one has the broader powertrain range. Pages that only dump two brochures side by side rarely hold clicks.
This comparison uses the newest verified generation of each model as the headline lens, then routes you into the exact generation sheets for the trim-level details. That is more durable than comparing incentives or dealer inventory, and more trustworthy than hiding missing data behind a made-up score.
Questions buyers ask
Which is more fuel-efficient, the CX-5 or the X3?
Mazda CX-5 wins on verified EPA combined economy at up to 38 MPG, versus 25 MPG for the BMW X3.
Which has more horsepower, the CX-5 or the X3?
BMW X3 reaches the higher verified peak at 382 hp, compared with 194 hp for the Mazda CX-5.
Which is safer: CX-5 or X3?
Mazda CX-5 has a latest recorded NHTSA overall rating of 5★; BMW X3 has not rated. Cross-check the frontal, side and rollover rows rather than using one headline number alone.
Is this a trim-by-trim comparison?
This page compares the newest verified generation of each model family. For year-specific engines, dimensions and trim tables, open the linked generation pages for each side.