Intel Core i3-10305T vs Intel Core i7-6700T Comparison

The Intel Core i3-10305T and Intel Core i7-6700T are both 35W desktop processors with identical core and thread counts, yet they represent different eras of Intel’s architecture. The data places them as near-statistical twins in overall average benchmark score, with the i3-10305T scoring 1922 and the i7-6700T scoring 1918, a delta of just 0.2%. However, a closer look at the individual benchmark results reveals a consistent performance advantage for the newer Comet Lake part across every test, making the comparison less about outright superiority and more about the nature of generational gains.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results are unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-10305T wins all six head-to-head tests. There is no workload category in the data where the Intel Core i7-6700T takes the lead. The i3-10305T’s advantages are evenly distributed across both single-threaded and multi-threaded scenarios, indicating that its lead comes from higher sustained clock speeds and architectural improvements rather than any workload-specific strength.

For users running lightly threaded applications, such as older games or legacy productivity software, the i3-10305T’s single-core performance is consistently ahead. Its Cinebench R23 single-core score of 938 versus the i7-6700T’s 839 represents an 11.8% advantage, which translates to snappier response in tasks that rely on one or two cores. Conversely, for multi-threaded rendering, video encoding, or compilation workloads, the i3-10305T maintains a similar lead, with its R23 multi-core score of 6647 outpacing the i7-6700T’s 5943 by 11.8%. The data shows no scenario where the older Skylake part catches up, making the i3-10305T the clear choice for any workload that benefits from higher IPC and clock speed.

The i7-6700T, despite its older architecture, holds its own in terms of average benchmark score, matching the i3-10305T within 0.2%. Its position among nearest rivals is comparable, with the i3-10305T sitting at 43rd percentile and the i7-6700T also at 43rd percentile. This suggests that while the i7-6700T loses every direct test, its overall capability is not far off, and it remains a viable option for platforms already on Socket 1151, where the i3-10305T would require a motherboard upgrade to Socket 1200.

Architecture Differences

The two processors are built on the same 14nm process node and both feature 4 cores and 8 threads, but their underlying architectures differ significantly. The i3-10305T is based on Comet Lake, with the codename Comet Lake-R, while the i7-6700T uses the older Skylake architecture. This generational gap accounts for the performance differences observed in the benchmarks.

Cache configurations are identical: each core has 64 KB of L1 and 256 KB of L2, with 8 MB of shared L3 cache. This means the performance delta cannot be attributed to cache capacity. Instead, the i3-10305T benefits from higher base and boost clocks, running at 3.00 GHz base and 4.00 GHz boost, compared to the i7-6700T’s 2.80 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. This 0.2 GHz base and 0.4 GHz boost advantage directly contributes to its superior scores.

Memory support is another key divergence. The i3-10305T supports only DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus, providing a memory bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s. The i7-6700T, being older, supports both DDR3 and DDR4, also dual-channel, but with a lower theoretical bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. This 8.6 GB/s difference in memory bandwidth likely plays a role in multi-threaded performance, where memory access patterns are more demanding. The integrated graphics also differ, with the i3-10305T featuring UHD Graphics 630 versus the HD Graphics 530 on the i7-6700T, though the benchmark data does not include graphics tests. Finally, the sockets are incompatible: the i3-10305T requires Intel Socket 1200, while the i7-6700T uses Intel Socket 1151.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably consistent, with the i3-10305T winning every test by a narrow margin of roughly 11.6% to 11.9%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-10305T scores 669 against the i7-6700T’s 599, a delta of 11.7%. The single-core R15 test shows a similar pattern: 94 versus 84, an 11.9% lead. These early-generation benchmarks set the tone for the rest of the comparison.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i3-10305T’s multi-core score of 2791 beats the i7-6700T’s 2496 by 11.8%, while the single-core score of 393 versus 352 represents an 11.6% advantage. The consistency of these deltas suggests that the performance gap is uniform across different rendering workloads and does not scale with the complexity of the test.

The most modern benchmark in the dataset, Cinebench R23, confirms the trend. The i3-10305T achieves a multi-core score of 6647, while the i7-6700T scores 5943, again an 11.8% difference. Single-core R23 results are 938 and 839, respectively, also an 11.8% gap. This uniformity across all six tests strongly indicates that the i3-10305T’s higher clock speeds and newer architecture provide a consistent and predictable performance uplift, rather than a workload-dependent advantage.

Notably, the i7-6700T has two additional Geekbench results in its benchmark list, scoring 3906 multi-core and 1128 single-core. However, these tests are not part of the head-to-head comparison, so they cannot be directly compared to the i3-10305T. Despite this missing data, the Cinebench suite alone is sufficient to establish the i3-10305T’s dominance in this matchup.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, beyond their benchmark scores. The i3-10305T has a base clock of 3.00 GHz and a boost clock of 4.00 GHz, while the i7-6700T operates at 2.80 GHz base and 3.60 GHz boost. This clock speed difference is the most direct explanation for the performance gap.

Memory support is another distinguishing factor. The i3-10305T supports DDR4 memory with a bandwidth of 42.7 GB/s, whereas the i7-6700T supports both DDR3 and DDR4, but with a lower bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. This makes the i3-10305T better suited for memory-intensive tasks on modern DDR4 platforms.

The socket and platform requirements differ as well: the i3-10305T uses Intel Socket 1200, while the i7-6700T uses Intel Socket 1151. This means they are not interchangeable in a system. The integrated graphics are also different, with the i3-10305T featuring UHD Graphics 630 and the i7-6700T featuring HD Graphics 530.

Production status and release dates are notable. The i3-10305T was released on 2021-03-15 and is marked as Active, while the i7-6700T was released on 2015-08-31 and is End-of-life. The launch MSRP for the i3-10305T is $143, while the i7-6700T launched at $303. Both processors have a TDP of 35W, use 14nm process, and lack ECC memory support. Neither has an unlocked multiplier.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-10305T has an average benchmark score of 1922, slightly higher than the Intel Core i7-6700T’s 1918, a delta of 0.2% in favor of the i3.

Q: How much faster is the i3-10305T in multi-threaded workloads?

A: Across all three Cinebench multi-core tests (R15, R20, R23), the i3-10305T leads by approximately 11.7% to 11.8%. For example, in R23 multi-core, it scores 6647 versus 5943 for the i7-6700T.

Q: Do the two processors have the same number of cores and threads?

A: Yes, both have 4 cores and 8 threads. They also share identical cache layouts, with 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, and 8 MB shared L3.

Q: What is the difference in memory bandwidth between the two?

A: The i3-10305T supports DDR4 with 42.7 GB/s bandwidth, while the i7-6700T supports DDR3 and DDR4 with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth, making the i3-10305T 8.6 GB/s faster.

Q: Are these processors compatible with the same motherboard socket?

A: No, the i3-10305T requires Intel Socket 1200, while the i7-6700T uses Intel Socket 1151, so they are not interchangeable in the same system.

Q: What are the production statuses of these two CPUs?

A: The i3-10305T is listed as Active with a release date of 2021-03-15, while the i7-6700T is End-of-life, having been released on 2015-08-31.