Intel Core i3-4360T vs Intel Core i3-6300 Comparison

FAQ

Q: How do the two processors compare in overall average benchmark score?

A: The Intel Core i3-6300 records an average benchmark score of 978, while the Intel Core i3-4360T sits at 963. The 6300 sits 0.2% ahead of the Intel Core i5-5257U, while the 4360T matches the Intel Pentium Gold G5500T exactly at 963.

Q: Which processor has the higher clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-6300 has a base clock of 3.80 GHz, whereas the Intel Core i3-4360T runs at 3.20 GHz. Neither processor features a boost clock, so these base frequencies represent the maximum sustained speed for both.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The Intel Core i3-6300 has a TDP of 51 watts, while the Intel Core i3-4360T is rated at 35 watts. The 4360T draws less power despite being built on an older process node.

Q: Do these processors support the same memory type?

A: No. The Intel Core i3-6300 supports DDR4 memory with dual-channel bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, while the Intel Core i3-4360T uses DDR3 memory. The 4360T has no recorded memory bandwidth figure in the database.

Q: Which processor has the larger die size?

A: The Intel Core i3-4360T has a die size of 177 mm², which is larger than the Intel Core i3-6300 at 150 mm². Both processors use the same transistor count of 1,400 million.

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the 4360T wins?

A: No. Across all five recorded head-to-head Cinebench tests, the Intel Core i3-6300 wins every category. The 4360T records zero wins in the comparison.

Architecture Differences

The Intel Core i3-6300 belongs to the Skylake architecture, built on a 14 nm process node, while the Intel Core i3-4360T uses the older Haswell architecture on a 22 nm process. This process shrink allows the 6300 to deliver higher performance while maintaining a moderate 51 watt TDP. The 4360T, despite its larger 177 mm² die, consumes only 35 watts because of its lower 3.20 GHz clock speed.

Both processors share the same transistor count at 1,400 million, but the Skylake design packs those transistors into a smaller area. Cache hierarchies are identical: 64 KB of L1 per core, 256 KB of L2 per core, and 4 MB of shared L3. Neither chip offers ECC memory support, and both are locked processors with no unlocked multiplier.

The socket situation differs significantly. The 6300 uses Intel Socket 1151, while the 4360T uses Intel Socket 1150. This means they are not interchangeable on the same motherboard. Memory support also diverges: the 6300 pairs with DDR4 modules and achieves a memory bandwidth of 34.1 GB/s, whereas the 4360T is confined to DDR3. The 6300 also lists PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), while the 4360T simply lists PCIe Gen 3 without a lane count.

Integrated graphics differ as well. The 6300 includes Intel HD 530, while the 4360T comes with Intel HD 4600. Both are desktop-class processors, and both remain in active production status according to the database. Release dates show the 4360T arrived earlier in July 2014, with the 6300 following in August 2015.

The Verdict

The data points to a straightforward conclusion: the Intel Core i3-6300 outperforms the Intel Core i3-4360T in every recorded benchmark. The 6300 leads by roughly 20% across all Cinebench tests, which represents a substantial gap for two dual-core, four-thread processors. The 6300's higher 3.80 GHz clock speed, combined with the newer Skylake architecture, delivers consistently superior results.

Buyers building a new system should consider the 6300 if they want DDR4 support and the newer Socket 1151 platform. The 4360T, however, offers a lower 35 watt TDP, which suits compact or low-power builds where thermal output matters more than raw performance. The 4360T also remains a viable choice for those with existing Socket 1150 motherboards and DDR3 memory, avoiding a full platform transition.

Both chips sit at the 26th percentile among all CPUs, indicating they occupy a similar tier in the overall performance landscape. The average benchmark scores differ by only 15 points (978 vs 963), which is less than 2%. Yet the head-to-head Cinebench results show a much larger gap, suggesting the 6300's advantage is consistent and meaningful in render workloads.

For users prioritizing single-threaded responsiveness, the 6300 wins decisively with 477 points in Cinebench R23 single-core versus 395 for the 4360T. For users prioritizing power efficiency, the 4360T's 35 watt TDP is the clear choice. The 6300's 51 watt TDP is higher but still modest for a desktop processor.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields. Base clock: the 6300 runs at 3.80 GHz, the 4360T at 3.20 GHz. TDP: 51 watts versus 35 watts. Socket: Socket 1151 versus Socket 1150. Architecture and codename: Skylake versus Haswell. Process node: 14 nm versus 22 nm. Die size: 150 mm² versus 177 mm². Memory support: DDR4 versus DDR3. Memory bandwidth: 34.1 GB/s versus no recorded figure. PCIe: Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only) versus Gen 3 without lane count. Integrated graphics: Intel HD 530 versus Intel HD 4600. Release date: August 2015 versus July 2014.

Identical specifications include core count (2), thread count (4), L1 cache (64 KB per core), L2 cache (256 KB per core), L3 cache (4 MB shared), transistor count (1,400 million), ECC support (false), unlocked multiplier (false), and market segment (Desktop). Both processors have no boost clock and no launch MSRP recorded.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i3-6300 wins all five head-to-head Cinebench tests. The largest margin comes in Cinebench R20 single-core, where the 6300 scores 200 against the 4360T's 165, a delta of 21.2%. The multicore tests show near-identical gaps: Cinebench R15 multicore gives 340 versus 282 (20.6% delta), Cinebench R20 multicore gives 1419 versus 1175 (20.8% delta), Cinebench R23 multicore gives 3380 versus 2799 (20.8% delta), and Cinebench R23 single-core gives 477 versus 395 (20.8% delta).

These consistent deltas across both single-core and multi-core workloads indicate that the 6300's advantage is not workload-specific. The performance gap appears proportional, likely stemming from the 6300's higher clock speed and architectural efficiency. The 4360T's older Haswell design cannot close the gap despite its lower power draw.

In the broader benchmark database, the 6300's nearest rivals include the Intel Core i5-5257U (0.2% behind), Intel Core i3-4150T (0.3% behind), Intel Core i3-4130 (0.3% behind), and AMD Athlon X4 840 (0.3% behind). The 4360T's nearest rivals include the Intel Pentium Gold G5500T (exact match), AMD A8-9600 (0.1% behind), Intel Celeron N5100 (0.4% ahead), and Intel Xeon X5570 (0.4% ahead). These rival comparisons show both processors landing in a tightly packed performance cluster.

Where Each One Wins

The Intel Core i3-6300 wins in every performance category measured. For rendering tasks, the Cinebench R23 multicore score of 3380 versus 2799 gives it a 20.8% lead. For single-threaded workloads, the R23 single-core score of 477 versus 395 provides the same 20.8% advantage. Users running CPU-intensive applications like video encoding, 3D rendering, or compilation will see meaningful time savings with the 6300.

The 6300 also wins on platform modernity. DDR4 memory support and the Socket 1151 interface align with newer motherboards and components. The 34.1 GB/s memory bandwidth figure confirms that the 6300 can feed its cores efficiently, especially compared to the 4360T's unrecorded bandwidth on DDR3.

The Intel Core i3-4360T does not win any benchmark, but it still holds advantages in specific usage scenarios. Its 35 watt TDP makes it suitable for systems where power and heat are primary concerns, such as small-form-factor desktops, always-on servers, or silent builds. The lower TDP also suggests lower cooling requirements, though the database does not specify cooler sizes.

The 4360T's Socket 1150 platform may appeal to users upgrading an existing system without replacing their motherboard or memory. For those already invested in DDR3, the 4360T avoids the cost of transitioning to DDR4. Its Intel HD 4600 graphics, while older than the 6300's HD 530, still provides basic display output for non-gaming systems.

In summary, the 6300 is the superior performer across all recorded benchmarks, while the 4360T serves a niche for power-conscious builds or platform continuity. The 26th percentile ranking for both chips confirms they occupy similar overall tiers, but the head-to-head data shows the 6300 as the clear winner within that tier.