CPU Comparison

The Intel Core i7-980X and Intel Core i3-10100 represent two very different eras of Intel desktop computing. The former is a six-core Gulftown flagship from the Westmere generation, while the latter is a four-core Comet Lake part from the 10th Generation. Benchmark data shows a fascinating split: the older i7-980X dominates modern multi-threaded Cinebench tests, while the newer i3-10100 wins decisively in Geekbench and single-core scenarios. Both processors sit at the 41st percentile among all CPUs, with nearly identical average benchmark scores of 1746 and 1742, respectively.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The most striking result in the head-to-head comparison is the i7-980X’s absolute dominance in Cinebench multi-core workloads. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-980X scores 584 against the i3-10100’s 258, a massive 126.4% advantage. This pattern repeats in Cinebench R20 multi-core, where the i7-980X posts 2434 versus 1076 (126.2% ahead), and in Cinebench R23 multi-core, where it scores 5797 against 2564 (126.1% ahead). These are not marginal wins; the older chip is consistently more than twice as fast in these rendering tests.

What is less expected is that the i7-980X also wins the single-core Cinebench battles, despite its much lower clock speeds. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i7-980X scores 82 against 88, a 6.8% deficit, but in Cinebench R20 single-core it flips to a 125.7% lead with 343 versus 152. The Cinebench R23 single-core result is similarly lopsided, with the i7-980X at 818 and the i3-10100 at 362, a 126% advantage. This suggests the older architecture’s per-thread performance in this specific benchmark suite is surprisingly strong, or the newer chip’s scores are constrained by other factors.

The i3-10100 takes its wins in Geekbench, and it takes them decisively. In Geekbench multi-core, the i3-10100 scores 4495 against the i7-980X’s 3247, a 27.8% lead. The single-core Geekbench result is even more one-sided: the i3-10100 records 1350 versus 659, a 51.2% advantage. Across all eight head-to-head tests, the i7-980X wins five and the i3-10100 wins three. The average benchmark scores, however, tell a different story, the i7-980X averages 1746 and the i3-10100 averages 1742, a difference of just 0.2%, placing them as near-perfect statistical equals overall.

Architecture Differences

The architectural divide between these two chips is generational. The i7-980X is built on Intel’s 32 nm process node and uses the Westmere architecture with the Gulftown codename. It packs 1,170 million transistors into a 239 mm² die. In contrast, the i3-10100 uses the 14 nm process node with the Comet Lake architecture, and its transistor count and die size are not listed in the available data. The process node difference alone, 32 nm versus 14 nm, explains a great deal about power efficiency and thermal characteristics, though exact figures beyond TDP are not provided.

Core and thread counts represent another fundamental split. The i7-980X offers 6 cores and 12 threads, giving it a 50% core advantage over the i3-10100’s 4 cores and 8 threads. Cache hierarchies also differ significantly. Both share identical L1 (64 KB per core) and L2 (256 KB per core) configurations, but the L3 cache is where they diverge: the i7-980X has 12 MB of shared L3, while the i3-10100 has only 6 MB. This doubling of last-level cache is a key reason the older chip excels in multi-threaded workloads.

Memory support is another major differentiator. The i7-980X uses DDR3 memory over a triple-channel bus, while the i3-10100 uses DDR4 over a dual-channel bus. The newer chip has a listed memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, whereas the older chip’s bandwidth is not specified. PCIe connectivity also differs: the i7-980X supports PCIe Gen 2, while the i3-10100 supports PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only). The i7-980X features an unlocked multiplier, making it overclocking-friendly, while the i3-10100 has a locked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The i7-980X is the clear winner for multi-threaded rendering and content creation workloads. Its Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 5797 is more than double the i3-10100’s 2564, and the pattern holds across R15 and R20. If a workload scales with cores and threads, the 6-core/12-thread i7-980X with its 12 MB L3 cache will consistently outpace the 4-core/8-thread i3-10100. The data suggests this chip remains a viable option for heavily threaded CPU-bound tasks, despite its 2010 release date.

The i3-10100 is the winner for general-purpose computing and lightly threaded applications. Its Geekbench multi-core score of 4495 is 27.8% ahead of the i7-980X, and its single-core score of 1350 is 51.2% ahead. For everyday desktop use, web browsing, office productivity, and applications that rely on single-thread performance, the i3-10100 is clearly superior. Its higher base clock of 3.60 GHz and boost clock of 4.30 GHz, combined with the newer Comet Lake architecture, deliver a snappier experience in most real-world tasks that do not fully utilize all cores.

The wins are not evenly distributed across benchmark types. The i7-980X’s five wins are all in Cinebench variants, while the i3-10100’s three wins are split between Geekbench multi-core and single-core. Users should choose based on their primary workloads: if rendering is the main task, the i7-980X is the data-backed choice; if general responsiveness and single-thread speed matter more, the i3-10100 is the pick.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ on nearly every core specification except for L1 and L2 cache per core. The i7-980X has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i3-10100 has 4 cores and 8 threads. Base clocks are 3.33 GHz for the i7-980X and 3.60 GHz for the i3-10100, with boost clocks of 3.60 GHz and 4.30 GHz, respectively. Thermal design power is a major split: the i7-980X draws 130 W, double the i3-10100’s 65 W.

Sockets are incompatible, with the i7-980X using Intel Socket 1366 and the i3-10100 using Intel Socket 1200. Process nodes are 32 nm versus 14 nm. The i7-980X has 1,170 million transistors on a 239 mm² die, while the i3-10100’s figures are not available. L3 cache is 12 MB shared versus 6 MB shared. Memory support is DDR3 triple-channel versus DDR4 dual-channel, with the i3-10100 listing 42.7 GB/s bandwidth. PCIe is Gen 2 on the i7-980X and Gen 3 with 16 lanes on the i3-10100. The i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier; the i3-10100 is locked. The i7-980X has no integrated graphics, while the i3-10100 includes UHD Graphics 630.

Production status also differs, the i7-980X is end-of-life, while the i3-10100 is active. Release dates are March 2010 for the i7-980X and April 2020 for the i3-10100. Part numbers are SLBUZ for the i7-980X and SRH3N for the i3-10100. Neither chip supports ECC memory.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core Cinebench tests?

A: The Intel Core i7-980X is significantly faster. It leads by 126.4% in Cinebench R15, 126.2% in R20, and 126.1% in R23 multi-core tests.

Q: How does the i3-10100 perform in Geekbench single-core compared to the i7-980X?

A: The i3-10100 is 51.2% ahead, scoring 1350 versus 659 in Geekbench single-core.

Q: What are the core and thread counts for each processor?

A: The i7-980X has 6 cores and 12 threads, while the i3-10100 has 4 cores and 8 threads.

Q: Do these CPUs have the same L3 cache size?

A: No. The i7-980X has 12 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-10100 has 6 MB.

Q: Which processor has a higher boost clock?

A: The i3-10100 has a higher boost clock of 4.30 GHz, compared to the i7-980X’s 3.60 GHz.

Q: Are both processors unlocked for overclocking?

A: No. The i7-980X has an unlocked multiplier, but the i3-10100 is locked.