Intel Core i3-8350K vs Intel Core i5-8500T Comparison

The Intel Core i5-8500T and Intel Core i3-8350K are both end-of-life desktop processors built on Intel’s 14 nm Coffee Lake architecture, yet they target very different operating points. The i5-8500T is a 35 W power-constrained part with six cores and a 2.10 GHz base clock, while the i3-8350K is a 91 W unlocked part with four cores and a 4.00 GHz base clock. Benchmark data shows a clear split: the i5-8500T wins six of eight head-to-head comparisons, but the i3-8350K claims decisive victories in Geekbench tests. The following analysis breaks down the data field by field.

FAQ

Q: Which processor has more physical cores?

A: The Intel Core i5-8500T has six cores and six threads, while the Intel Core i3-8350K has four cores and four threads.

Q: How do the base clock speeds compare between the two?

A: The i3-8350K has a base clock of 4.00 GHz, which is significantly higher than the i5-8500T’s 2.10 GHz base clock. The i5-8500T has a boost clock of 3.50 GHz, whereas the i3-8350K has no listed boost clock.

Q: Which CPU has a larger L3 cache?

A: The i5-8500T has 9 MB of shared L3 cache, while the i3-8350K has 8 MB of shared L3 cache. Both have 64 KB of L1 cache and 256 KB of L2 cache per core.

Q: What are the power consumption differences?

A: The i5-8500T has a thermal design power (TDP) of 35 W, compared to 91 W for the i3-8350K. This makes the i5-8500T substantially more power-efficient on paper.

Q: Does the i3-8350K support ECC memory?

A: Yes, the i3-8350K supports ECC memory. The i5-8500T does not support ECC memory.

Q: Which CPU has an unlocked multiplier for overclocking?

A: The i3-8350K has an unlocked multiplier, as indicated by its "K" designation. The i5-8500T does not have an unlocked multiplier.

Where Each One Wins

The benchmark results paint a picture of two distinct strengths. The i5-8500T dominates all Cinebench tests, which are heavily threaded rendering workloads. In Cinebench R23 multi-core, the i5-8500T scores 6571 against 5884 for the i3-8350K, an 11.7% advantage. The i5-8500T also leads in Cinebench R15 multi-core with 662 versus 593 (11.6% delta) and Cinebench R20 multi-core with 2759 versus 2471 (11.7% delta). Even in Cinebench single-core tests, the i5-8500T wins by roughly 12% across R15, R20, and R23, despite its lower base clock.

The i3-8350K, however, wins decisively in Geekbench tests. In Geekbench multi-core, it scores 4992 versus 4293 for the i5-8500T, a 14% advantage. In Geekbench single-core, the margin grows to 24.1%, with the i3-8350K scoring 1564 against 1187. This indicates that for workloads that scale with raw clock speed and per-core performance—such as certain legacy or lightly threaded applications—the i3-8350K is the stronger choice. The i5-8500T wins where thread count matters most, while the i3-8350K wins where clock speed dominates.

Architecture Differences

Both processors share the same fundamental architecture: Coffee Lake on a 14 nm process node from Intel, using the Intel Socket 1151. The L1 and L2 cache layouts are identical at 64 KB and 256 KB per core, respectively. The key architectural differences lie in core configuration, cache size, and features.

The i5-8500T features six physical cores with six threads, while the i3-8350K has four cores and four threads. This two-core advantage gives the i5-8500T a natural edge in multi-threaded throughput. The L3 cache also differs slightly: the i5-8500T has 9 MB shared, while the i3-8350K has 8 MB shared.

The i3-8350K has a die size of 126 mm², a figure not listed for the i5-8500T. More importantly, the i3-8350K includes ECC memory support and an unlocked multiplier, neither of which is present on the i5-8500T. The integrated graphics are nominally the same (UHD 630 for the i5-8500T and UHD Graphics 630 for the i3-8350K), and both use Gen 3 PCIe with 16 lanes from the CPU.

Memory bandwidth differs: the i5-8500T supports 42.7 GB/s, while the i3-8350K supports 38.4 GB/s, both over dual-channel DDR4. The i5-8500T also has a lower TDP (35 W vs 91 W), reflecting its "T" low-power designation.

Specification Differences

| Specification | Intel Core i5-8500T | Intel Core i3-8350K |

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

| Cores / Threads | 6 / 6 | 4 / 4 |

| Base Clock | 2.10 GHz | 4.00 GHz |

| Boost Clock | 3.50 GHz | None listed |

| TDP | 35 W | 91 W |

| L3 Cache | 9 MB (shared) | 8 MB (shared) |

| Memory Bandwidth | 42.7 GB/s | 38.4 GB/s |

| ECC Memory | False | True |

| Multiplier Unlocked | False | True |

| Die Size | Not listed | 126 mm² |

| Release Date | 2018-04-01 | 2017-10-04 |

| Launch MSRP | None listed | $168 |

| Part Number | SR3XD | SR3N4 |

The i3-8350K has a higher base clock by 1.90 GHz and a 56 W higher TDP. It also offers ECC support and an unlocked multiplier. The i5-8500T counters with two additional cores, more L3 cache, higher memory bandwidth, and a later release date. Both are end-of-life desktop parts with the same socket, process node, and PCIe configuration.

Head-to-Head Benchmarks

The head-to-head data shows a consistent pattern across Cinebench: the i5-8500T wins every test by roughly 11-12%. In Cinebench R15 multi-core, the i5-8500T scores 662 against 593 (11.6% delta). Single-core R15 shows 93 versus 83 (12% delta). R20 multi-core yields 2759 versus 2471 (11.7% delta), and R20 single-core 389 versus 348 (11.8% delta). R23 multi-core follows with 6571 versus 5884 (11.7% delta), and R23 single-core 927 versus 830 (11.7% delta). These margins are remarkably consistent, suggesting the i5-8500T’s two extra cores provide a steady multi-core advantage, while its higher boost clock (3.50 GHz) compensates for the lower base clock in single-core tests.

The i3-8350K’s wins come in Geekbench, where the results are far more lopsided. In Geekbench multi-core, the i3-8350K scores 4992 versus 4293 for the i5-8500T, a 14% delta. Geekbench single-core is even more pronounced: 1564 versus 1187, a 24.1% delta. This is a substantial gap, indicating that the i3-8350K’s 4.00 GHz base clock (with no boost) delivers significantly higher per-thread performance in this specific benchmark suite. The i5-8500T’s wins in Cinebench are consistent but moderate, while the i3-8350K’s wins in Geekbench are larger in magnitude.

Average benchmark scores are nearly identical: the i5-8500T averages 2110, and the i3-8350K averages 2096. Both sit at the 46th percentile among all CPUs. The nearest rivals for the i5-8500T include the Intel Core i5-8259U (avg 2108, 0.1% delta) and AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G (avg 2101, 0.4% delta). For the i3-8350K, the nearest rival is the AMD Ryzen 7 1700X (avg 2094, 0.1% delta) and the AMD Ryzen 5 PRO 2400G (avg 2101, -0.2% delta). This shows both processors occupy the same overall performance tier, despite their divergent strengths.

The Verdict

The data supports a straightforward selection based on workload. The Intel Core i5-8500T is the pick for multi-threaded rendering and content creation, as it wins all Cinebench tests by approximately 12% while drawing 56 W less power. Its six cores and 9 MB L3 cache provide a tangible throughput advantage in heavily threaded tasks. The i5-8500T also offers higher memory bandwidth (42.7 GB/s vs 38.4 GB/s), which may benefit memory-sensitive workloads.

The Intel Core i3-8350K is the choice for applications that favor raw clock speed and per-core performance, as evidenced by its 24.1% lead in Geekbench single-core and 14% lead in Geekbench multi-core. Its 4.00 GHz base clock, unlocked multiplier, and ECC memory support make it a more flexible part for overclocking and reliability-focused builds. However, its 91 W TDP and lack of a boost clock mean it trades efficiency for raw frequency.

For a system where power consumption is a priority and multi-threaded workloads dominate, the i5-8500T is the data-backed winner. For a system where single-threaded performance and overclocking headroom matter more, the i3-8350K is the stronger candidate. The average benchmark scores are nearly equal, so the decision hinges entirely on which benchmark suite reflects the intended use case. The i5-8500T wins six of eight head-to-head tests, but the i3-8350K wins the two tests by larger margins, making it a matter of workload weighting rather than overall superiority.