Intel Core i3-7100H vs Intel Core i5-4300M Comparison

The Intel Core i3-7100H and Intel Core i5-4300M are both dual-core mobile processors from Intel, but they represent two very different eras of laptop computing. The i3-7100H is a Kaby Lake-H part from early 2017, built for performance-oriented laptops, while the i5-4300M is a Haswell chip from late 2013, a workhorse of the previous generation. The benchmark data shows a clear and consistent performance gap, despite the i5 carrying a higher-tier brand name and a boost clock, making this comparison a fascinating study of generational improvement versus nominal product positioning.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head results are remarkably one-sided. In every single Cinebench test listed, the Intel Core i3-7100H emerges as the winner, and the margin is strikingly consistent. Across the multicore tests—Cinebench R15, R20, and R23—the i3-7100H posts a delta of 16.6% over the i5-4300M. This uniformity is notable; it suggests a fundamental architectural advantage rather than a workload-specific quirk.

Looking at the raw scores, the story is clear. In Cinebench R15 multicore, the i3-7100H scores 295 against the i5-4300M's 253. That same 16.6% gap carries over to Cinebench R20 multicore, where the scores are 1231 and 1056, and again to Cinebench R23 multicore, with scores of 2932 and 2515. The i3-7100H's advantage is not just in raw throughput; it also extends to single-threaded performance, where the delta is similar if slightly smaller. In Cinebench R20 singlecore, the i3-7100H scores 173 against 149, a 16.1% lead. In R23 singlecore, it scores 414 versus 355, again a 16.6% lead. This is a comprehensive victory.

The fact that the i5-4300M has a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, whereas the i3-7100H has no listed boost clock and a lower base clock of 2.80 GHz versus 2.60 GHz, makes this outcome even more interesting. The data implies that the i3-7100H's newer Kaby Lake architecture and 14 nm process node allow it to do more per clock cycle than the older Haswell design, even when the i5 has the ability to ramp up its frequency. The i5's boost capability is evidently not enough to overcome the i3's architectural efficiency.

The aggregate benchmark scores confirm this hierarchy. The i3-7100H has an average benchmark score of 1009, while the i5-4300M sits just slightly lower at 1004. While this overall margin is small, the head-to-head Cinebench data shows the i3's dominance is more pronounced in those specific workloads. The i3-7100H also holds a marginal edge in the percentile ranking, sitting at the 28th percentile of all CPUs compared to the i5-4300M's 27th percentile. The nearest rivals for each chip underscore how close they are in the broader landscape; the i3-7100H is within 0.3% of the Intel Processor N100 and the Intel Core i5-10210Y, while the i5-4300M is nearly tied with the Intel Core i5-2500S and within 0.2% of the AMD FX-9830P. This shows that while they are close in the grand scheme of all CPUs, the i3-7100H has a definitive edge in the tests they share.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous: the Intel Core i3-7100H is the superior processor in this matchup. Benchmark results indicate that it wins 5 out of 5 head-to-head comparisons, with a consistent performance advantage of about 16.6% across both single-threaded and multi-threaded Cinebench workloads. Anyone choosing between these two strictly on performance should select the i3-7100H. The i5-4300M's higher-tier branding and boost clock do not translate into a real-world win; the newer architecture of the i3-7100H is the decisive factor. While the i5-4300M does have a Geekbench multicore score of 1817 and a singlecore score of 882, the i3-7100H has no corresponding Geekbench data in the pack, so those numbers cannot be compared directly. However, in the tests where they do compete, the i3-7100H wins every time. From a pure performance perspective, the choice is clear.

FAQ

Q: Which processor is faster in multi-core workloads?

A: The Intel Core i3-7100H is faster. It wins the Cinebench R15, R20, and R23 multicore tests with a 16.6% lead in each, scoring 295, 1231, and 2932 respectively, compared to the i5-4300M's 253, 1056, and 2515.

Q: Does the i5-4300M's higher boost clock help it win in single-core tests?

A: No. Despite having a 3.60 GHz boost clock, the i5-4300M loses the single-core tests. The i3-7100H scores 173 and 414 in Cinebench R20 and R23 singlecore, respectively, beating the i5-4300M's 149 and 355.

Q: What is the overall performance difference between these two CPUs?

A: In their head-to-head benchmark suite, the i3-7100H wins all 5 tests. The performance delta is consistently around 16.6%, with the single-core R20 test showing a slightly smaller 16.1% difference.

Q: How do these processors compare to their closest rivals?

A: The i3-7100H has an average benchmark score of 1009, making it a near-exact match for the Intel Processor N100 (1007) and the Intel Core i5-10210Y (1006). The i5-4300M's average score of 1004 places it in a tie with the Intel Core i5-2500S and just behind the Intel Core i7-5600U (1005).

Q: Which chip has a higher percentile ranking among all CPUs?

A: The i3-7100H has a slightly higher percentile ranking, sitting at the 28th percentile, while the i5-4300M is at the 27th percentile.

Q: Are there any benchmark categories where the i5-4300M wins?

A: In the head-to-head data provided, the i5-4300M does not win any of the 5 benchmark comparisons. The i3-7100H is the winner in all of them.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, starting with their base clocks. The i3-7100H has a base clock of 2.80 GHz, while the i5-4300M has a base clock of 2.60 GHz. More critically, the i5-4300M features a boost clock of 3.60 GHz, a feature entirely absent from the i3-7100H's spec sheet. The thermal design power (TDP) also differs slightly, with the i3-7100H rated at 35 W and the i5-4300M at 37 W. The socket types are different as well; the i3-7100H uses Intel BGA 1440, while the i5-4300M uses Intel Socket G3.

Memory support is another point of divergence. The i3-7100H supports both DDR3 and DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration, whereas the i5-4300M supports only DDR3. The i3-7100H also lists PCIe support as "Gen 3, 16 Lanes(CPU only)", a feature not listed for the i5-4300M. The integrated graphics differ, with the i3-7100H featuring an Intel HD Graphics 630 and the i5-4300M an Intel HD 5000. The release dates are far apart, with the i3-7100H launching in 2017 and the i5-4300M in 2013. The i3-7100H has a launch MSRP of $225, while no launch MSRP is listed for the i5-4300M. Finally, the i3-7100H has a part number (SR32T) and a production status of "End-of-life", while the i5-4300M has neither listed.

Architecture Differences

The architectural gap between these two chips is the primary reason for their performance divide. The i3-7100H is built on the Kaby Lake architecture, specifically the Kaby Lake-H codename, using a 14 nm process node. In contrast, the i5-4300M is based on the much older Haswell architecture and uses a larger 22 nm process node. The die size reflects this, with the i3-7100H measuring 126 mm² and the i5-4300M at 118 mm², despite the i5 having a more mature process. The i5-4300M's transistor count is listed as 1,400 million, while the i3-7100H's transistor count is not provided.

Cache configurations are identical on the surface, with both having 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 3 MB of shared L3 cache. The core and thread counts are also the same, with both featuring 2 cores and 4 threads. The key differences lie in the process node and architecture generation. The 14 nm Kaby Lake part benefits from a more refined design and manufacturing process compared to the 22 nm Haswell part. This newer process allows for higher efficiency and better performance per clock. The i3-7100H also supports a newer memory standard (DDR4) and a newer PCIe generation (Gen 3), indicating a more modern platform overall.

Where Each One Wins

Based on the benchmark data, the i3-7100H wins in every measured category. It is faster in all Cinebench workloads, both single-core and multi-core, making it the better choice for almost any task that relies on CPU performance. This includes general productivity, web browsing, and even light content creation, where the 16.6% multicore advantage would be noticeable. The i3-7100H's lead in single-core performance also suggests it would be snappier in day-to-day tasks that are not heavily threaded.

The i5-4300M, conversely, does not have a single benchmark win to its name in this comparison. However, the data does show that its average benchmark score of 1004 is very close to the i3-7100H's 1009. This means that in the broader context of all CPUs, they are near-equivalents. Its strengths are not in raw performance but in its platform. The i5-4300M uses the Intel Socket G3, a socketed design, which potentially offers more upgradeability or serviceability in laptops compared to the i3-7100H's BGA 1440 soldered design. For a user with a laptop that supports the i5-4300M, it remains a functional, if not class-leading, processor. The data indicates that if a choice must be made purely on CPU performance, the i3-7100H is the definitive winner, but the i5-4300M is not an irrelevant part, given its near-identical aggregate score.