Intel Core i3-8300 vs Intel Core i7-1060G7 Comparison

The Intel Core i7-1060G7 and Intel Core i3-8300 occupy opposite ends of the Intel lineup, yet benchmark data places them in a statistical tie. Both processors achieve the 39th percentile among all CPUs, with the i7-1060G7 averaging 1591 points and the i3-8300 averaging 1564 points—a gap of only 1.7%. The i7-1060G7 wins all six head-to-head Cinebench comparisons, but its margins never exceed 2.6%, making this a contest defined by efficiency and platform rather than raw performance dominance.

The Verdict

The data points to a clear split based on use case and platform constraints. The Intel Core i7-1060G7 is the choice for mobile workloads where power consumption is critical; its 9W TDP versus the i3-8300's 62W TDP represents a 53W advantage that no benchmark score can offset in a laptop context. Users needing a thin, fanless or passively cooled system should select the i7-1060G7, as its Ice Lake-Y architecture is specifically designed for that segment.

The Intel Core i3-8300, by contrast, is the desktop part. Its Socket 1151 compatibility and 16 PCIe Gen 3 lanes (CPU only) make it suitable for traditional tower builds with discrete graphics. The i3-8300 also offers ECC memory support, a feature absent on the i7-1060G7, which matters for workstation reliability. For users building a low-cost desktop with existing DDR4 memory, the i3-8300's dual-channel memory bus and 38.4 GB/s bandwidth provides a straightforward upgrade path.

Benchmark results show the i7-1060G7 leads in every test, but the margins are negligible—between 1.6% and 2.6% across single and multi-core workloads. This means the i3-8300 is not a performance sacrifice in most real-world tasks; it trades a small amount of speed for a desktop socket, ECC support, and a much higher power envelope. The production status tells the story: the i3-8300 is end-of-life, while the i7-1060G7 remains active, indicating Intel's strategic direction toward efficiency over raw clock speed.

Architecture Differences

The two processors represent different Intel nodes and design philosophies. The i7-1060G7 uses a 10 nm process with a 123 mm² die, while the i3-8300 uses a 14 nm process with a 126 mm² die. The smaller node allows the i7-1060G7 to fit its 4 cores and 8 threads into a 9W thermal envelope, whereas the i3-8300's 4 cores and 4 threads require 62W. This thread advantage is significant: the i7-1060G7 has Hyper-Threading, doubling its thread count to 8, while the i3-8300 is limited to 4 threads.

Cache hierarchies differ in the L1 and L3 levels. The i7-1060G7 has 80 KB of L1 cache per core, compared to 64 KB per core on the i3-8300. Both share 8 MB of L3 cache, but the i7-1060G7's L1 advantage suggests a more efficient memory access pattern. The integrated graphics also differ: the i7-1060G7 features Iris Plus, while the i3-8300 has UHD Graphics 630. For users relying on integrated graphics, the Iris Plus in the i7-1060G7 is positioned as a higher-tier solution.

Memory support diverges in channel count. The i7-1060G7 supports quad-channel DDR4, while the i3-8300 is dual-channel. However, the i3-8300 has a specified memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s, while the i7-1060G7's bandwidth is not listed. Socket and platform compatibility are entirely different: the i7-1060G7 uses Intel BGA 1440 (soldered), while the i3-8300 uses Intel Socket 1151 (LGA, replaceable). The i3-8300 also supports ECC memory, a feature absent on the mobile part.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has a higher clock speed?

A: The i3-8300 has a base clock of 3.70 GHz, while the i7-1060G7 has a base clock of 1.00 GHz and a boost clock of 3.80 GHz. The i3-8300 does not have a listed boost clock.

Q: Can the i7-1060G7 be used in a desktop motherboard?

A: No. The i7-1060G7 uses Intel BGA 1440, which is a soldered mobile socket. The i3-8300 uses Intel Socket 1151, a desktop LGA socket.

Q: Does the i3-8300 support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the i3-8300 has ECC memory support enabled. The i7-1060G7 does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which processor has more threads for multi-tasking?

A: The i7-1060G7 has 8 threads (4 cores with Hyper-Threading), while the i3-8300 has 4 threads (4 cores without Hyper-Threading). This gives the i7-1060G7 a 100% thread count advantage.

Q: What is the production status of each processor?

A: The i7-1060G7 is listed as Active, while the i3-8300 is listed as End-of-life. This indicates Intel continues to produce the mobile part but has discontinued the desktop part.

Q: How do the average benchmark scores compare?

A: The i7-1060G7 has an average benchmark score of 1591, while the i3-8300 scores 1564. The i7-1060G7 is 1.7% higher, which is within the margin of error for most workloads.

Specification Differences

• Threads: 8 (i7-1060G7) vs 4 (i3-8300)
• Base Clock: 1.00 GHz (i7-1060G7) vs 3.70 GHz (i3-8300)
• Boost Clock: 3.80 GHz (i7-1060G7) vs not listed (i3-8300)
• TDP: 9W (i7-1060G7) vs 62W (i3-8300)
• Socket: Intel BGA 1440 (i7-1060G7) vs Intel Socket 1151 (i3-8300)
• Process Node: 10 nm (i7-1060G7) vs 14 nm (i3-8300)
• Die Size: 123 mm² (i7-1060G7) vs 126 mm² (i3-8300)
• L1 Cache: 80 KB per core (i7-1060G7) vs 64 KB per core (i3-8300)
• Memory Bus: Quad-channel (i7-1060G7) vs Dual-channel (i3-8300)
• Memory Bandwidth: Not listed (i7-1060G7) vs 38.4 GB/s (i3-8300)
• ECC Memory: False (i7-1060G7) vs True (i3-8300)
• PCIe: Gen 3 (i7-1060G7) vs Gen 3, 16 Lanes CPU only (i3-8300)
• Integrated Graphics: Iris Plus (i7-1060G7) vs UHD Graphics 630 (i3-8300)
• Market Segment: Mobile (i7-1060G7) vs Desktop (i3-8300)
• Production Status: Active (i7-1060G7) vs End-of-life (i3-8300)
• Release Date: 2019-07-31 (i7-1060G7) vs 2018-02-13 (i3-8300)
• Launch MSRP: Not listed (i7-1060G7) vs $138 (i3-8300)
• Part Number: Not listed (i7-1060G7) vs SR3XY (i3-8300)

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark results are remarkably consistent across all six Cinebench tests, with the i7-1060G7 winning each by a narrow margin. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i7-1060G7 scores 554 versus the i3-8300's 545, a 1.7% lead. The single-core test shows a slightly larger gap: 78 versus 76, a 2.6% advantage for the i7-1060G7. This single-core margin is the largest of any comparison, suggesting the i7-1060G7's boost clock of 3.80 GHz provides a meaningful edge over the i3-8300's fixed 3.70 GHz base.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the patterns hold. Multi-core scores are 2310 for the i7-1060G7 and 2271 for the i3-8300, again a 1.7% difference. Single-core results show 325 versus 320, a 1.6% lead for the i7-1060G7. The consistency of these deltas—hovering between 1.6% and 1.7% across both generations of the Cinebench suite—indicates that the performance relationship is stable regardless of workload scaling.

Cinebench R23 confirms the trend. Multi-core scores are 5500 for the i7-1060G7 and 5408 for the i3-8300, a 1.7% gap. Single-core scores are 776 versus 763, also a 1.7% difference. The i7-1060G7's 8 threads versus the i3-8300's 4 threads should theoretically provide a larger multi-core advantage, but the i3-8300's much higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 1.00 GHz) compensates for the lack of Hyper-Threading. The result is that the i7-1060G7 wins all six benchmarks but never by more than 2.6%.

The average benchmark scores reinforce this narrative. The i7-1060G7's 1591 average is 1.7% above the i3-8300's 1564. In the broader context, the i7-1060G7 sits 0.3% above the Intel Core i3-8300T and 0.8% below the Intel Core i3-9100E. The i3-8300, meanwhile, is exactly tied with the Intel Core i5-6600T and 0.1% above the AMD Ryzen 3 1300X. These nearest-rival comparisons show both processors clustering within a narrow band of performance, making the architectural differences—node, TDP, and socket—more consequential than raw benchmark numbers.