CPU Comparison

# Intel Core i3-6300 vs Intel Core i3-4130

The Intel Core i3-6300 and Intel Core i3-4130 are both dual-core desktop processors with Hyper-Threading, but they belong to different generations and platforms. The i3-6300 is a Skylake part on Socket 1151, while the i3-4130 is a Haswell part on Socket 1150. In head-to-head Cinebench testing, the i3-6300 wins all five benchmark comparisons, with a consistent 19.3% advantage in multi-core tests and a 19% lead in Cinebench R20 single-core. The average benchmark scores are nearly identical, 978 for the i3-6300 versus 975 for the i3-4130, placing both at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, but the raw performance deltas tell a clearer story of generational improvement.

FAQ

Q: How much faster is the Core i3-6300 than the Core i3-4130 in multi-core workloads?

A: The i3-6300 leads by 19.3% in every multi-core Cinebench test. Specifically, it scores 340 versus 285 in Cinebench R15 multi-core, 1419 versus 1189 in R20 multi-core, and 3380 versus 2833 in R23 multi-core.

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Core i3-6300 runs at 3.80 GHz, while the Core i3-4130 runs at 3.40 GHz. Neither processor has a boost clock, so these are fixed operating frequencies.

Q: Do these CPUs support the same memory type?

A: No. The Core i3-6300 supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. The Core i3-4130 supports DDR3 memory in dual-channel mode, with no memory bandwidth figure listed in the data.

Q: Are these processors on the same socket?

A: No. The i3-6300 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the i3-4130 uses Intel Socket 1150. They are not interchangeable between motherboards.

Q: Which processor has better integrated graphics?

A: The Core i3-6300 features Intel HD 530 graphics, while the Core i3-4130 features Intel HD 4400. The i3-6300's newer graphics architecture is tied to its Skylake generation.

Q: How do these CPUs compare in average benchmark score?

A: The i3-6300 has an average benchmark score of 978, and the i3-4130 scores 975. The difference is only 0.3%, placing both at the 26th percentile of all CPUs.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent a full generation gap in Intel's desktop lineup. The Core i3-6300 is built on Skylake architecture using a 14 nm process node, while the Core i3-4130 uses Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process node. Both are manufactured by Intel and contain 1,400 million transistors, but the die size differs: the i3-6300 measures 150 mm², while the i3-4130 is larger at 177 mm². This smaller die on a more advanced node explains part of the i3-6300's efficiency advantage.

Cache configuration is another differentiator. Both chips have 64 KB of L1 cache per core and 256 KB of L2 cache per core, but the shared L3 cache differs. The i3-6300 has 4 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-4130 has 3 MB. That extra 1 MB of L3 cache, combined with the newer architecture and higher clock speed, contributes to the i3-6300's consistent performance lead.

Memory support also diverges. The i3-6300 uses DDR4 memory with a rated bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, whereas the i3-4130 uses DDR3. Both run in dual-channel mode. The PCIe implementation differs as well: the i3-6300 provides Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the i3-4130 lists simply "Gen 3" without a lane count. Neither processor supports ECC memory, and both have locked multipliers, meaning no overclocking headroom.

The integrated graphics differ between generations. The i3-6300 pairs with Intel HD 530, while the i3-4130 has Intel HD 4400. Both are desktop-market parts, and both remain in active production status. The release dates are about two years apart, with the i3-4130 launching in 2013 and the i3-6300 in 2015.

The Verdict

The data points decisively toward the Core i3-6300 for anyone building on a current platform. It wins every head-to-head benchmark by roughly 19.3%, which is a substantial generational improvement. The i3-6300 offers a higher base clock (3.80 GHz versus 3.40 GHz), more L3 cache (4 MB versus 3 MB), a smaller and more efficient 14 nm die, and support for DDR4 memory with documented bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s. It also carries a newer integrated graphics solution in the HD 530.

However, the i3-4130 is not without merit. Its average benchmark score of 975 is within 0.3% of the i3-6300's 978, meaning that in the broader context of all CPUs, they perform at essentially the same tier. Both sit at the 26th percentile. The i3-4130 also has a slightly lower TDP at 54 watts versus 51 watts for the i3-6300, though the difference is marginal. The i3-4130 uses DDR3, which can be cheaper and more readily available in existing systems.

For a new build, the i3-6300 is the clear choice: it wins every benchmark, has better memory bandwidth, and uses a socket that supports newer platform features. For someone upgrading an existing Socket 1150 system, the i3-4130 remains a viable part, but there is no performance argument for choosing it over the i3-6300 in a fresh configuration. The 19.3% multi-core lead is consistent across all Cinebench versions tested, and the single-core lead is nearly identical at 19% in R20 and 19.3% in R23.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. The base clock differs: 3.80 GHz for the i3-6300 versus 3.40 GHz for the i3-4130, and neither has a boost clock. TDP is slightly higher on the older chip at 54 watts versus 51 watts. The socket is different, Socket 1151 for the i3-6300 and Socket 1150 for the i3-4130, which means they are not cross-compatible.

The process node is a major difference: 14 nm for Skylake versus 22 nm for Haswell. Die size also differs, with the i3-6300 at 150 mm² and the i3-4130 at 177 mm², despite both having 1,400 million transistors. L3 cache is 4 MB shared on the i3-6300 versus 3 MB shared on the i3-4130. Memory support is DDR4 for the i3-6300 and DDR3 for the i3-4130, with the i3-6300 listing a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s while the i3-4130 has no listed value. PCIe is listed as "Gen 3, 16 Lanes (CPU only)" for the i3-6300 and simply "Gen 3" for the i3-4130. Integrated graphics differ: Intel HD 530 versus Intel HD 4400. The part numbers also differ, SR2HA for the i3-6300 and SR1NP for the i3-4130.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are uniform in direction but worth examining for magnitude. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-6300 scores 340 against the i3-4130's 285, a 19.3% delta. In Cinebench R20 multi-core, the scores are 1419 versus 1189, again a 19.3% delta. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows 3380 versus 2833, still 19.3%. The consistency of this 19.3% figure across three different Cinebench versions suggests a fixed architectural and clock advantage rather than a test-specific anomaly.

Single-core results tell a similar story, though with slightly different margins. In Cinebench R20 single-core, the i3-6300 scores 200 versus 168, a 19% delta. In Cinebench R23 single-core, it scores 477 versus 400, a 19.3% delta. The i3-6300 also has a Cinebench R15 single-core score of 52, though the i3-4130 has no corresponding R15 single-core score listed in the data. The average benchmark scores are nearly tied, 978 for the i3-6300 and 975 for the i3-4130, which might seem to contradict the head-to-head results, but the average includes a broader set of workloads beyond Cinebench, and the 0.3% delta is well within the margin of their percentile grouping.

The nearest rivals for both chips are essentially the same set of processors. For the i3-6300, the closest competitors are the Intel Core i5-5257U (976, +0.2%), the i3-4150T (975, +0.3%), the i3-4130 itself (975, +0.3%), and the AMD Athlon X4 840 (975, +0.3%). For the i3-4130, the nearest rivals are the Athlon X4 840 (975, 0%), the i3-4150T (975, 0%), the AMD A10-7870K (975, 0%), and the i5-5257U (976, -0.1%). This clustering shows that both chips sit in a dense performance band where many alternatives score within a fraction of a percent.

Where Each One Wins

The Core i3-6300 wins in every measured benchmark category. It has a 19.3% advantage in multi-core workloads across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23, and a 19% to 19.3% lead in single-core tests. Its higher base clock of 3.80 GHz, larger 4 MB L3 cache, and newer Skylake architecture with 14 nm process node all contribute to these wins. For memory-intensive workloads, the i3-6300's DDR4 support with 34.1 GB/s bandwidth provides a modern memory subsystem, and its HD 530 integrated graphics are a generation ahead of the i3-4130's HD 4400.

The Core i3-4130 does not win any head-to-head benchmarks, but it has attributes that suit specific situations. Its 54-watt TDP is slightly higher than the i3-6300's 51 watts, but it uses DDR3 memory, which may be more accessible for someone with an existing Socket 1150 motherboard. The i3-4130's average benchmark score of 975 is effectively tied with the i3-6300's 978, meaning that in mixed workloads outside Cinebench, the two chips perform at the same level. The i3-4130 also remains in active production, so it is still a purchasable part for legacy platform maintenance.

For a builder choosing between these two on a fresh platform, the i3-6300 is the only rational pick. It offers consistent 19.3% performance gains, modern memory support, and a smaller die with better efficiency. For someone constrained to Socket 1150, the i3-4130 is a capable dual-core with Hyper-Threading, but it is outclassed in every benchmark where the two are directly compared. The data shows no scenario where the i3-4130 outperforms the i3-6300, so the decision comes down to platform compatibility rather than raw performance.