Intel Core i3-10105F vs Intel Core i7-7700 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How does the Intel Core i3-10105F compare to the Intel Core i7-7700 in overall performance?

A: The database shows the Core i3-10105F has a higher average benchmark score of 12,644 compared to the Core i7-7700's 11,914. Both CPUs sit at the 67th percentile among all processors, meaning they land in the same performance tier, but the i3 leads by roughly 6% on average.

Q: Which CPU wins more individual benchmark tests?

A: The Core i3-10105F wins 17 of the 19 head-to-head tests recorded in the database. The Core i7-7700 takes only two wins: passmark_find_prime_numbers and passmark_physics.

Q: What is the biggest performance gap between the two chips?

A: The largest margin is in passmark_single_thread, where the Core i3-10105F leads by 8.4% with a score of 2,647 versus 2,442. Similarly large gaps appear in passmark_extended_instructions (7.7% lead) and geekbench_singlecore (7.4% lead).

Q: Do both processors have the same core and thread counts?

A: Yes, both are 4-core, 8-thread desktop parts. The difference is in clock speeds: the Core i3-10105F has a 3.70 GHz base and 4.40 GHz boost, while the Core i7-7700 runs at 3.60 GHz base and 4.20 GHz boost.

Q: Can the Core i7-7700 use the same motherboard as the Core i3-10105F?

A: No. The Core i3-10105F uses Intel Socket 1200, while the Core i7-7700 uses Intel Socket 1151. They are not socket-compatible.

Q: Is the Core i7-7700 still in production?

A: Yes, according to the database both processors are listed as Active in production status. The Core i3-10105F was released in March 2021, while the Core i7-7700 launched in January 2017.

Architecture Differences

Both CPUs come from Intel's 14 nm process node, but they belong to different architectural generations. The Core i3-10105F is built on Comet Lake, specifically the Comet Lake-R codename, and belongs to the Core i3 (Comet Lake) generation. The Core i7-7700 uses the older Kaby Lake architecture and is part of the Core i7 (Kaby Lake) generation. This generational gap matters: Comet Lake is a later refinement of Intel's 14 nm process, which explains why the i3 achieves higher clock speeds at the same 65 W TDP.

Cache configurations differ meaningfully. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache tells a different story. The Core i7-7700 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the Core i3-10105F has only 6 MB. That is a 2 MB deficit for the newer chip, yet the i3 still manages to outperform the i7 in most tests, which points to the clock speed advantage and architectural refinements offsetting the smaller cache.

Memory support is similar but not identical. Both use DDR4 in dual-channel configuration, but the Core i3-10105F has a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s for the Core i7-7700. Neither chip supports ECC memory. PCIe connectivity is the same on paper: Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

One notable difference is integrated graphics. The Core i7-7700 includes an HD 630 iGPU, while the Core i3-10105F has no integrated graphics at all, as indicated by the "F" suffix. This means the i3 requires a discrete GPU for any display output, whereas the i7 can run headless or with a basic display adapter.

Both processors have locked multipliers, so neither supports easy overclocking via multiplier adjustment. The Core i3-10105F has a launch MSRP of $97, while no launch MSRP is recorded for the Core i7-7700 in the database.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Core i3-10105F dominates the Cinebench suite across the board, but the margins are modest. In cinebench_r15_multicore, the i3 scores 759 against the i7's 740, a 2.6% lead. The single-core version of that test shows 107 versus 104, a 2.9% edge. Moving to cinebench_r20, the multicore result is 3,165 for the i3 and 3,084 for the i7, again a 2.6% gap, while single-core is 446 versus 435, a 2.5% margin. Cinebench_r23 follows the same pattern: 7,537 versus 7,344 in multicore (2.6% lead) and 1,064 versus 1,036 in single-core (2.7% lead). These are consistent wins, but none of them are dramatic. The i3 is faster in every Cinebench iteration, yet the i7 is never far behind.

Geekbench shows a larger separation. The multicore score is 4,920 for the i3 versus 4,640 for the i7, a 6% advantage. Single-core is even more decisive: 1,470 versus 1,369, a 7.4% lead. This suggests the i3's higher boost clock translates into a more noticeable real-world responsiveness advantage in lightly threaded workloads.

The Passmark suite reinforces the i3's edge in most compute tasks. Data compression favors the i3 by 6.7% (130,647 versus 122,429). Data encryption is closer at 2.4% (3,045 versus 2,974). Extended instructions show a 7.7% gap (8,753 versus 8,128), and floating point math is 7.5% higher (18,166 versus 16,904). Integer math sits at 5% (28,921 versus 27,538), multithread at 3.4% (8,930 versus 8,635), and random string sorting at 5.8% (16,414 versus 15,509).

The two tests the i7 wins are worth examining. Passmark find prime numbers goes to the i7 at 28 versus 25, a 10.7% margin, which is the largest single delta in either direction. Physics also favors the i7 at 588 versus 571, a 2.9% edge. These wins suggest the i7 retains an advantage in certain math-heavy or physics simulation workloads, despite losing most other tests.

Single-thread performance in Passmark is a clear i3 victory: 2,647 versus 2,442, an 8.4% lead in both passmark_single_thread and passmark_singlethread (the database records the same result under both names).

Specification Differences

The following fields differ between the two processors in the database:

• Architecture: Comet Lake (Comet Lake-R) for the i3-10105F, Kaby Lake for the i7-7700
• Generation: Core i3 (Comet Lake) versus Core i7 (Kaby Lake)
• Base clock: 3.70 GHz versus 3.60 GHz
• Boost clock: 4.40 GHz versus 4.20 GHz
• L3 cache: 6 MB shared versus 8 MB shared
• Memory bandwidth: 42.7 GB/s versus 38.4 GB/s
• Socket: Intel Socket 1200 versus Intel Socket 1151
• Integrated graphics: None versus HD 630
• Release date: March 2021 versus January 2017
• Launch MSRP: $97 versus no recorded value
• Part number: SRH8V versus SR338

Identical specifications include core count (4), thread count (8), TDP (65 W), process node (14 nm), L1 cache (64 KB per core), L2 cache (256 KB per core), memory type (DDR4), memory bus (dual-channel), ECC support (false), PCIe generation (Gen 3), PCIe lanes (16 from CPU), market segment (Desktop), production status (Active), and multiplier unlock status (false).

Where Each One Wins

The Core i3-10105F is the stronger all-around performer. It wins every Cinebench test, both Geekbench tests, and the majority of Passmark workloads. The 8.4% single-thread lead in Passmark and 7.4% lead in Geekbench single-core make it the better choice for everyday responsiveness, office work, web browsing, and lightly threaded applications. Its 6% Geekbench multicore advantage and 6.7% data compression lead also make it the better pick for general multitasking and file archive handling. The 7.7% edge in extended instructions could matter for code that leverages modern SIMD or specialized instruction sets, and the 7.5% floating point advantage helps in scientific or rendering workloads that rely on FPU throughput.

The Core i7-7700 has a narrower set of strengths. Its 10.7% win in prime number finding suggests it still holds up in specific integer math routines, and the 2.9% physics win indicates a slight edge in physics simulation tasks. The larger 8 MB L3 cache may contribute to these wins, since some workloads benefit from more on-die cache even at lower clock speeds. The integrated HD 630 graphics is also a practical advantage for users who want a system that can output video without a discrete GPU, though it is not a gaming solution by any means.

For pure performance per clock, the i3 wins. For legacy cache-sensitive workloads or physics-heavy tasks, the i7 remains relevant. The i3's socket compatibility with newer 1200 boards and its lower launch MSRP of $97 make it the more modern platform choice, but the i7's iGPU and cache size are its only clear hardware advantages.

The Verdict

The benchmark data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-10105F outperforms the Intel Core i7-7700 in 17 of 19 recorded tests, with average benchmark scores of 12,644 versus 11,914. The i3 wins every single-threaded test by margins ranging from 2.5% to 8.4%, and it wins every Cinebench and Geekbench test as well. This makes it the better buy for almost any workload, especially given that it is a newer platform with higher memory bandwidth and a lower launch MSRP of $97.

The Core i7-7700 should only be chosen if one of its two specific strengths matters more than overall performance. If the workload is dominated by prime number calculations or physics simulation, the i7's wins in those tests (10.7% and 2.9% respectively) are the only measurable areas where it beats the i3. The integrated HD 630 graphics is another consideration: if the system must run without a discrete GPU, the i7 can do so while the i3 cannot. Users with an existing Socket 1151 motherboard may also find the i7 a cheaper drop-in upgrade than moving to a Socket 1200 board.

For everyone else, the Core i3-10105F is the clear recommendation based on the recorded data. It is faster in the vast majority of tests, has a higher boost clock, offers better memory bandwidth, and comes from a more recent generation. The 2 MB L3 cache deficit does not prevent it from winning, which indicates the clock speed and architectural improvements matter more in practice. The i7-7700 is a capable processor that still holds value in niche cases, but the i3-10105F is the better all-around part.