Intel Core i3-8300 vs Intel Core i3-9100T Comparison

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark split is completely one-sided. The Intel Core i3-8300 wins all six recorded head-to-head tests, covering both single-core and multi-core workloads across three versions of Cinebench. The Intel Core i3-9100T records zero wins in the database. This is not a close contest by any metric.

The i3-8300 is the choice for raw performance in any task that scales with CPU throughput. Its wins are consistent across every test category, from the older Cinebench R15 to the newer R23. The margins are also uniform, hovering around 13% in every comparison. This consistency suggests the performance gap is structural, not workload-specific.

The i3-9100T, by contrast, is a low-power part. Its 35 W TDP makes it eligible for systems where thermal and power constraints matter, such as compact desktops or fanless builds. The database does not include power efficiency benchmarks, so the exact trade-off cannot be quantified here, but the TDP difference is the clear differentiator. The i3-8300 has a 62 W TDP, nearly double the i3-9100T's figure.

For users who prioritize absolute performance, the i3-8300 wins without qualification. For users who prioritize low power draw and are willing to sacrifice roughly 13% of performance, the i3-9100T is the only reasonable pick between the two. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the i3-9100T outperforms the i3-8300.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Coffee Lake on a 14 nm process, built by Intel. Both use the Intel Socket 1151 platform. Both have 4 cores and 4 threads. Both integrate UHD Graphics 630. Both support DDR4 memory with a dual-channel bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both support ECC memory. Both provide PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The differences are subtle but meaningful. The i3-8300 is part of the original Coffee Lake generation, while the i3-9100T belongs to the Coffee Lake Refresh. The refresh brought a lower base clock: 3.10 GHz for the i3-9100T versus 3.70 GHz for the i3-8300. However, the i3-9100T has a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, while the i3-8300 has no listed boost clock, meaning it runs at a fixed 3.70 GHz.

The cache layout differs. The i3-8300 has 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-9100T has 6 MB. Both have the same per-core L1 (64 KB) and L2 (256 KB) caches. The smaller L3 cache on the i3-9100T is a direct consequence of the lower power target, likely paired with a more conservative binning strategy.

The process node is identical at 14 nm, and the die size is the same at 126 mm². Production status for both is end-of-life. Release dates differ: the i3-8300 launched in February 2018, the i3-9100T in August 2018. The part numbers are SR3XY for the i3-8300 and SRCZX for the i3-9100T.

Neither processor has an unlocked multiplier, so overclocking is not supported on either. The integrated graphics are identical in name, UHD Graphics 630, though the database does not list specific GPU clock speeds or execution units.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The database records six direct comparisons, all from the Cinebench suite. The i3-8300 wins every one.

In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-8300 scores 545 against the i3-9100T's 482. That is a 13.1% advantage. In single-core R15, the i3-8300 scores 76 against 67, a 13.4% edge. The single-core margin is slightly larger than the multi-core margin, but both are in the same range.

Cinebench R20 shows a similar pattern. Multi-core: 2271 for the i3-8300 versus 2010 for the i3-9100T, a 13% difference. Single-core: 320 versus 283, also 13.1%. These numbers are consistent with the R15 results, confirming that the performance gap is stable across benchmark generations.

Cinebench R23, the newest test in the database, repeats the trend. Multi-core: 5408 versus 4788, a 12.9% gap. Single-core: 763 versus 675, a 13% gap. The differences are almost perfectly uniform, ranging from 12.9% to 13.4%. This uniformity suggests the i3-9100T's lower base clock and reduced cache are the primary factors, rather than any workload-specific behavior.

The i3-9100T does have additional benchmarks in the database that the i3-8300 lacks, namely Geekbench results. The i3-9100T scores 3443 in Geekbench multi-core and 1215 in single-core. However, since the i3-8300 has no Geekbench entries, these cannot be compared directly. They only serve to place the i3-9100T in the broader database context.

The average benchmark score tells a more nuanced story. The i3-8300 has an average score of 1564, while the i3-9100T has an average of 1620. The i3-9100T's average is higher because it includes Geekbench scores, which are not present for the i3-8300. This is a database artifact, not a performance reversal. The head-to-head results are unambiguous: the i3-8300 is faster in every shared test.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specifications, all of which favor the i3-8300 for performance and the i3-9100T for efficiency.

Base clock: 3.70 GHz for the i3-8300, 3.10 GHz for the i3-9100T. The i3-9100T has a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, matching the i3-8300's fixed clock, but the i3-8300 has no boost clock listed.

TDP: 62 W for the i3-8300, 35 W for the i3-9100T. This is the most significant difference. The i3-9100T uses 43.5% less power by TDP, which is the entire reason for its existence.

L3 cache: 8 MB for the i3-8300, 6 MB for the i3-9100T. A 25% reduction in shared cache on the low-power part.

Generation: Coffee Lake for the i3-8300, Coffee Lake Refresh for the i3-9100T. The refresh is a minor update, not a new architecture.

Release date: February 2018 for the i3-8300, August 2018 for the i3-9100T. The i3-9100T launched six months later.

Launch MSRP: The i3-8300 was $138, the i3-9100T was $122. This is the only price information in the database.

All other specifications are identical: 4 cores, 4 threads, 14 nm process, 126 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, DDR4 support, dual-channel memory bus, 38.4 GB/s memory bandwidth, ECC support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, UHD Graphics 630, Intel Socket 1151, locked multiplier, desktop market segment, end-of-life production status.

FAQ

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

A: The Intel Core i3-8300 wins all three multi-core Cinebench tests. It scores 545 in R15, 2271 in R20, and 5408 in R23, versus 482, 2010, and 4788 for the i3-9100T. The margins are 13.1%, 13%, and 12.9% respectively.

Q: Why does the i3-9100T have a higher average benchmark score than the i3-8300?

A: The i3-9100T has additional Geekbench results in the database (3443 multi-core, 1215 single-core) that the i3-8300 does not have. These extra scores raise its average to 1620, compared to 1564 for the i3-8300. In the shared Cinebench tests, the i3-8300 is consistently faster.

Q: What is the TDP difference between the two?

A: The i3-8300 has a TDP of 62 W, while the i3-9100T has a TDP of 35 W. The i3-9100T consumes significantly less power, which is its primary design goal.

Q: Do both processors have the same cache configuration?

A: No. Both have 64 KB L1 and 256 KB L2 per core, but the L3 cache differs: 8 MB shared on the i3-8300 versus 6 MB shared on the i3-9100T.

Q: Is there any benchmark where the i3-9100T wins?

A: No. The database records six head-to-head comparisons, all won by the i3-8300. The i3-9100T has zero wins. The i3-9100T's only advantage is its lower TDP, which is not a benchmark score.

Q: Are both processors based on the same architecture?

A: Yes, both use Coffee Lake on a 14 nm process with the same 126 mm² die size. The i3-9100T is part of the Coffee Lake Refresh, a minor update, but the core architecture is the same.

The Verdict

The data is unambiguous. The Intel Core i3-8300 is the faster processor in every recorded benchmark. It leads by roughly 13% in all six Cinebench tests, with margins ranging from 12.9% to 13.4%. The consistency of these margins indicates a fundamental performance gap driven by two factors: a higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.10 GHz) and a larger L3 cache (8 MB versus 6 MB).

Users who need maximum CPU performance from an Intel Socket 1151 platform should pick the i3-8300. It delivers a solid, uniform advantage in both single-core and multi-core workloads, and its 62 W TDP is still manageable for standard desktop cooling. The i3-8300's launch MSRP was $138, and it is now end-of-life, so availability will depend on existing stock.

The Intel Core i3-9100T is for a different use case entirely. Its 35 W TDP makes it suitable for systems with tight thermal budgets, such as small-form-factor PCs, embedded systems, or passively cooled builds. The performance sacrifice is measurable but not catastrophic: roughly 13% across the board. For workloads that are not CPU-bound, this difference may be acceptable. The i3-9100T also has a lower launch MSRP of $122, but the database does not provide enough information to assess whether that price difference offsets the performance loss.

Neither processor is unlocked, so overclocking is not an option for closing the gap. Both are end-of-life, so longevity is a concern for both. The i3-9100T has a slight advantage in having Geekbench scores in the database, which gives it a higher average benchmark score (1620 versus 1564), but this is misleading because the i3-8300 lacks Geekbench entries entirely.

The verdict is straightforward: choose the i3-8300 for performance, choose the i3-9100T for low power draw. There is no scenario in the recorded data where the i3-9100T offers better performance, and no scenario where the i3-8300 offers lower power consumption. The decision rests entirely on which of those two priorities matters more for the intended system.