Intel Core i3-8300T vs Intel Core i3-9300 Comparison

# Intel Core i3-8300T vs Intel Core i3-9300: A Clear Performance Tier Gap

The Intel Core i3-9300 is the outright winner across every benchmark recorded in the database, posting a consistent 13 to 14 percent advantage over the Intel Core i3-8300T in both single-core and multi-core workloads. The i3-8300T is a low-power, 35-watt part designed for efficiency-constrained systems, while the i3-9300 is a 62-watt desktop processor that trades power for speed. The data shows zero benchmark wins for the i3-8300T, with the i3-9300 taking all six head-to-head tests. Both CPUs share the same 14 nm Coffee Lake architecture, four cores, four threads, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache, but the i3-9300's higher clock speeds and higher power ceiling translate directly into measurable performance gains. The i3-8300T sits at the 39th percentile of all CPUs, and the i3-9300 also sits at the 39th percentile, which indicates that despite the i3-9300's clear internal advantage, both parts occupy a similar lower-midrange position in the overall CPU landscape.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has the higher base clock speed?

A: The Intel Core i3-9300 has a base clock of 3.70 GHz, while the Intel Core i3-8300T has a base clock of 3.20 GHz. The i3-9300 also has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, whereas the i3-8300T has no recorded boost clock.

Q: How much power does each CPU draw?

A: The Intel Core i3-8300T has a TDP of 35 watts, making it a low-power part. The Intel Core i3-9300 has a TDP of 62 watts, which is nearly double the power envelope of the i3-8300T.

Q: What is the performance difference in Cinebench R23 multi-core?

A: The Intel Core i3-9300 scores 5374 in Cinebench R23 multi-core, while the Intel Core i3-8300T scores 4656. This represents a 13.4 percent advantage for the i3-9300.

Q: Do both processors support ECC memory?

A: Yes, both the Intel Core i3-8300T and the Intel Core i3-9300 support ECC memory. Both also support DDR4 memory with dual-channel configuration and a memory bandwidth of 38.4 GB/s.

Q: Are these CPUs unlocked for overclocking?

A: No, neither processor has an unlocked multiplier. The multiplierUnlocked field is false for both the Intel Core i3-8300T and the Intel Core i3-9300.

Q: What integrated graphics do these processors include?

A: The Intel Core i3-8300T includes UHD Graphics 630, and the Intel Core i3-9300 includes UHD 630. Both are integrated graphics solutions from Intel.

Architecture Differences

Both processors are built on Intel's Coffee Lake architecture using a 14 nm process node, and both are manufactured by Intel. The die size is identical at 126 mm² for both chips. The core and thread configuration is the same: four physical cores and four threads, meaning no hyper-threading on either part. The cache hierarchy is also identical, with 64 KB of L1 cache per core, 256 KB of L2 cache per core, and 8 MB of shared L3 cache.

The fundamental architectural difference lies in the generation designation. The i3-8300T belongs to the Core i3 (Coffee Lake) generation, released in April 2018, while the i3-9300 belongs to the Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) generation, released in April 2019. The Coffee Lake Refresh generation brings a higher base clock (3.70 GHz versus 3.20 GHz) and adds a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, which the original Coffee Lake i3-8300T lacks entirely. The i3-9300 achieves this higher performance through a significantly higher TDP of 62 watts compared to the i3-8300T's 35 watts, allowing the i3-9300 to sustain higher clock speeds under load.

Both processors use the same Intel Socket 1151, support PCIe Gen 3 with 16 lanes (CPU only), and have identical memory support: DDR4, dual-channel, with 38.4 GB/s bandwidth. Both also support ECC memory, which is notable for entry-level workstation use. The integrated graphics differ only in naming: UHD Graphics 630 for the i3-8300T versus UHD 630 for the i3-9300, though both are the same Intel integrated graphics family. The i3-8300T's part number is SR3Y1, and the i3-9300's part number is SRCZU.

Where Each One Wins

The data records zero benchmark wins for the Intel Core i3-8300T across all six head-to-head tests. The i3-9300 wins every single test, including both single-core and multi-core variants of Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. This makes the use-case split straightforward: the i3-9300 is the superior choice for any workload that benefits from raw processing speed.

The i3-8300T's only advantage is its power efficiency. With a TDP of 35 watts versus the i3-9300's 62 watts, the i3-8300T is designed for systems where heat dissipation and power consumption are primary constraints, such as small form factor desktops or always-on systems. The i3-8300T also has a lower launch MSRP of $138 compared to the i3-9300's launch MSRP of $143, though the performance gap is much larger than the price gap.

For users prioritizing maximum compute throughput, the i3-9300 is the clear choice. The i3-9300's 4.30 GHz boost clock provides a substantial single-core advantage, which translates to faster response times in lightly threaded applications. The i3-9300 also leads in multi-core tests by the same margin, indicating that the clock speed advantage is consistent across all core counts. The i3-8300T is only preferable in scenarios where the 35-watt power envelope is a hard requirement, as its performance is uniformly lower across all recorded benchmarks.

Specification Differences

The two processors differ in several key specification fields, while sharing many others. The base clock differs: the i3-8300T runs at 3.20 GHz, while the i3-9300 runs at 3.70 GHz. The i3-9300 has a boost clock of 4.30 GHz, while the i3-8300T has no recorded boost clock. The TDP differs substantially: 35 watts for the i3-8300T versus 62 watts for the i3-9300.

The generation and release dates differ: the i3-8300T is from the Core i3 (Coffee Lake) generation, released April 2018, while the i3-9300 is from the Core i3 (Coffee Lake Refresh) generation, released April 2019. The launch MSRP differs slightly: $138 for the i3-8300T and $143 for the i3-9300. The part numbers also differ: SR3Y1 for the i3-8300T and SRCZU for the i3-9300.

The integrated graphics naming differs: UHD Graphics 630 for the i3-8300T versus UHD 630 for the i3-9300. All other major specifications are identical, including cores (4), threads (4), socket (Intel Socket 1151), architecture (Coffee Lake), process node (14 nm), die size (126 mm²), cache sizes (64 KB L1 per core, 256 KB L2 per core, 8 MB L3 shared), memory support (DDR4, dual-channel, 38.4 GB/s), ECC support (true for both), PCIe (Gen 3, 16 lanes CPU only), market segment (Desktop), production status (End-of-life for both), and multiplier unlock status (false for both).

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The Intel Core i3-9300 wins all six head-to-head benchmark comparisons, and the margins are remarkably consistent across every test. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i3-9300 scores 541 against the i3-8300T's 469, a 13.3 percent advantage. In Cinebench R15 single-core, the i3-9300 scores 76 against 66, a 13.2 percent advantage. The consistency of these margins suggests a uniform clock-speed-driven performance difference rather than any architectural efficiency advantage.

Moving to Cinebench R20, the i3-9300 scores 2257 in multi-core versus the i3-8300T's 1955, a 13.4 percent lead. In single-core R20, the i3-9300 scores 318 versus 275, a 13.5 percent lead. The Cinebench R23 results follow the same pattern: the i3-9300 scores 5374 in multi-core versus 4656 for the i3-8300T, a 13.4 percent lead, and 758 in single-core versus 657, a 13.3 percent lead.

The i3-8300T does have one additional benchmark data point that the i3-9300 lacks: Geekbench scores. The i3-8300T records 3436 in Geekbench multi-core and 1171 in Geekbench single-core. However, since there is no corresponding Geekbench score for the i3-9300 in the database, these numbers cannot be directly compared. The i3-8300T's average benchmark score is 1586, while the i3-9300's average benchmark score is 1554, though this is based on different benchmark sets and does not indicate the i3-8300T is faster.

The nearest rivals for the i3-8300T include the Intel Core i7-1060G7 (average score 1591, 0.3 percent higher), the AMD Opteron 6282 SE (average score 1569, 1.1 percent lower), the Intel Core i3-9100E (average score 1605, 1.2 percent higher), and the Intel Core i3-8300 (average score 1564, 1.4 percent lower). The nearest rivals for the i3-9300 include the Intel Xeon E3-1268L v5 (average score 1557, 0.2 percent higher), the Intel Core i5-4690S (average score 1551, 0.2 percent lower), the AMD FX-8350 (average score 1557, 0.2 percent higher), and the Intel Core i3-1115G4E (average score 1559, 0.3 percent higher).

The Verdict

The Intel Core i3-9300 is the clear performance winner, taking all six recorded head-to-head benchmarks with a consistent 13 to 14 percent margin over the Intel Core i3-8300T. The i3-9300's higher base clock of 3.70 GHz, boost clock of 4.30 GHz, and 62-watt TDP enable it to deliver uniformly better results in both single-core and multi-core workloads across Cinebench R15, R20, and R23. Anyone building a desktop system where processing speed is the priority should choose the i3-9300 without hesitation.

The Intel Core i3-8300T is not without its place. Its 35-watt TDP makes it suitable for power-constrained builds where the 62-watt i3-9300 would be excessive, such as compact or passively cooled systems. The i3-8300T also carries a slightly lower launch MSRP of $138 versus $143 for the i3-9300, though both parts are now end-of-life. The i3-8300T's performance is respectable in absolute terms, with a Cinebench R23 multi-core score of 4656, but it trails the i3-9300 in every measurable way.

Both processors share identical core counts, thread counts, cache configurations, memory support, and PCIe capabilities, so platform compatibility is not a differentiator. The decision comes down to power budget versus performance. The data shows no scenario where the i3-8300T outperforms the i3-9300, so the i3-9300 is the default recommendation for standard desktop use. The i3-8300T is only the right choice when the 35-watt power envelope is a non-negotiable system requirement.