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

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The benchmark record for these two 35-watt Coffee Lake quad-cores is unusually one-sided. The Intel Core i3-9100T wins all eight recorded head-to-head comparisons, with the largest margins appearing in single-threaded workloads. In Geekbench single-core, the 9100T scores 1215 against 1171 for the 8300T, a 3.8% advantage that stands as the widest gap in the entire dataset. Cinebench R20 single-core follows closely, with the 9100T posting 283 versus 275, a 2.9% lead.

Multi-threaded results tell a similar story, though the margins narrow slightly. The 9100T takes Cinebench R15 multi-core with 482 points against 469, a 2.8% edge, and repeats that exact 2.8% delta in Cinebench R20 multi-core, scoring 2010 versus 1955. Cinebench R23 multi-core shows the same pattern: 4788 for the 9100T, 4656 for the 8300T, again 2.8%. Even the Geekbench multi-core test, which typically compresses differences between same-core-count parts, favors the 9100T, albeit narrowly at 0.2% (3443 versus 3436).

The consistency of these deltas matters. Every Cinebench generation, whether R15, R20, or R23, records a multi-core advantage between 2.7% and 2.9% for the 9100T. Single-core Cinebench tests show a 1.5% lead in R15 and 2.9% in R20, with R23 at 2.7%. This uniformity suggests a clock-frequency advantage rather than an architectural efficiency gain, a point reinforced by the specification sheets.

The 9100T also holds a slight edge in the aggregate database average score: 1620 versus 1586, a 2.1% difference. Both CPUs sit at the 39th percentile among all recorded processors, placing them in the same performance tier. The nearest rivals for the 9100T include the Intel Core i7-970 at 1613 (0.4% slower), the Intel Pentium Gold G7400T at 1628 (0.5% faster), and the Intel Core i7-10610U at 1611 (0.6% slower). For the 8300T, the competition includes the Intel Core i7-1060G7 at 1591 (0.3% faster), the AMD Opteron 6282 SE at 1569 (1.1% slower), and the Intel Core i3-9100E at 1605 (1.2% faster). These rival positions confirm that both parts occupy a narrow band of mid-range desktop performance, with the 9100T sitting slightly higher within that band.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental design: Intel's Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process node, with four physical cores and four threads, no hyper-threading. The die size is identical at 126 mm², and both use the Intel Socket 1151 platform. The integrated graphics are also the same, UHD Graphics 630 in both cases, and both support DDR4 memory in a dual-channel configuration with a peak bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s. ECC memory support is present on both, and PCIe connectivity is Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU.

The key architectural differentiator is the L3 cache. The 8300T carries 8 MB of shared L3 cache, while the 9100T has 6 MB. This is a counterintuitive advantage for the older part, as the 8300T has 25% more last-level cache per core (2 MB per core versus 1.5 MB per core). Despite this cache deficit, the 9100T still wins every benchmark, which suggests the clock-speed difference overrides the cache-capacity advantage.

Clock speeds tell the rest of the story. The 8300T has a base clock of 3.20 GHz and no recorded boost clock, meaning it operates at a fixed frequency. The 9100T has a base clock of 3.10 GHz but a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, a 19% increase over its base. In single-threaded workloads, the 9100T can ramp to that 3.70 GHz ceiling, while the 8300T appears locked at 3.20 GHz. This explains the 3.8% Geekbench single-core delta and the consistent 2.7% to 2.9% Cinebench single-core leads. The multi-core deltas, slightly lower at 2.8%, likely reflect thermal or power constraints that prevent all four cores from sustaining peak boost simultaneously.

Both CPUs belong to the Core i3 generation lineage, but the 9100T is part of the Coffee Lake Refresh, while the 8300T is original Coffee Lake. The 9100T carries part number SRCZX and the 8300T uses SR3Y1. Neither has an unlocked multiplier. Production status for both is end-of-life, so the comparison is purely historical. The 9100T launched later, on 2018-08-31, while the 8300T appeared on 2018-04-01.

Where Each One Wins

Given that the 9100T wins all eight recorded benchmarks, the use-case split is lopsided, but the margins matter for real-world decisions. The 9100T is the better choice for lightly threaded applications where single-core performance dominates. The 3.8% Geekbench single-core lead and the 2.9% Cinebench R20 single-core advantage translate directly into faster response times in everyday desktop tasks, web browsing, and office productivity, where most workloads rarely engage more than one or two cores.

The 8300T, despite losing every benchmark, retains one structural advantage: the larger 8 MB L3 cache. In workloads that repeatedly access a working set larger than 6 MB but smaller than 8 MB, the 8300T could theoretically reduce memory traffic. However, the recorded benchmark data does not isolate such a scenario, and the multi-core results show the 9100T still pulling ahead by 2.8% even in cache-sensitive rendering workloads like Cinebench.

For multi-threaded rendering, the 9100T's boost behavior is the deciding factor. The Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 4788 versus 4656 shows a 2.8% lead, and the R15 and R20 results mirror this. The 9100T's ability to sustain higher clocks under load, even with the smaller cache, overcomes the 8300T's cache advantage. Power consumption is identical on paper, both rated at 35 watts TDP, so there is no efficiency trade-off to consider.

The 8300T's only practical win scenario is a system that requires maximum cache capacity per core at a fixed, lower clock. But the benchmark record offers no evidence that such a configuration yields better results in the tested applications. For any workload represented in this database, the 9100T is the faster part, and the margins, while modest, are consistent across every test generation.

FAQ

Q: Which CPU is faster in single-core performance?

A: The Intel Core i3-9100T wins every single-core benchmark. Geekbench single-core shows 1215 versus 1171, a 3.8% lead. Cinebench R20 single-core shows 283 versus 275, a 2.9% lead.

Q: Does the larger cache on the 8300T help in multi-core workloads?

A: No. Despite having 8 MB of L3 cache versus 6 MB on the 9100T, the 8300T loses all three Cinebench multi-core tests by 2.8%. The clock-speed advantage of the 9100T overrides the cache-capacity difference.

Q: Are these CPUs the same generation?

A: Both use the Coffee Lake architecture on a 14 nm process, but the 9100T is part of the Coffee Lake Refresh generation, while the 8300T is original Coffee Lake. The 9100T launched later, on 2018-08-31, versus 2018-04-01 for the 8300T.

Q: What is the power draw of each processor?

A: Both are rated at 35 watts TDP, making them equally efficient on paper. The 9100T does have a boost clock of 3.70 GHz, while the 8300T has no recorded boost clock and runs at a fixed 3.20 GHz.

Q: Do both CPUs support the same memory and expansion features?

A: Yes. Both support DDR4 memory in dual-channel mode with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth, both have ECC memory support, and both provide PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes from the CPU. Integrated graphics are UHD Graphics 630 on both.

Q: How do these CPUs compare to their nearest rivals in the database?

A: The 9100T has an average score of 1620, putting it 0.4% ahead of the Intel Core i7-970 and 0.5% behind the Intel Pentium Gold G7400T. The 8300T averages 1586, placing it 0.3% behind the Intel Core i7-1060G7 and 1.1% ahead of the AMD Opteron 6282 SE.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i3-9100T | Intel Core i3-8300T |

|---|---|---|

| Base clock | 3.10 GHz | 3.20 GHz |

| Boost clock | 3.70 GHz | None recorded |

| L3 cache | 6 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Generation | Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) | Core i3 (Coffee Lake) |

| Release date | 2018-08-31 | 2018-04-01 |

| Launch MSRP | $122 | $138 |

| Part number | SRCZX | SR3Y1 |

The remaining specifications are identical: 4 cores, 4 threads, 35 watts TDP, Intel Socket 1151, 14 nm process, 126 mm² die size, 64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, DDR4 dual-channel memory at 38.4 GB/s, ECC support, PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes, UHD Graphics 630, and locked multipliers. Both are end-of-life desktop parts. The 9100T compensates for its smaller cache with a 3.70 GHz boost clock, while the 8300T relies on a higher base clock of 3.20 GHz but no boost capability. The launch MSRP difference of $16 favored the 9100T, but both have since been discontinued.