OVERALL
ALTERNATIVES
SPECS
VS AVERAGE
REVIEWS
Scored using Processors Methodology v1.0
Processors Methodology v1.0
Mathematical & Unbiased Scoring
Products in this category are evaluated mathematically under Frontumo Processors Methodology v1.0 using verified laboratory benchmarks, technical specifications, and authentic consumer ratings with 0% commercial bias.
Explore Processors Methodology v1.0

Intel Core i3 6300T Review | 78 Data compared

Avg. price:~£35PassMark benchmark result:3985N. of physical cores:2CPU boost clock speed:N/A GHzCPU socket:LGA1151TDP (Thermal design power):35 W

Intel Core i3 6300T Review: Compare 78 technical specifications and user reviews to see how this product ranks in the Processors category and whether it is worth buying.

4.1

Overall score

Score
4.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An overall evaluation of the processor's quality, based on technical analyses and user reviews.
When it matters
When you need a quick reference to identify the best processors on the market.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Score components

90%

3.9

Technical score

10%

6.4

User score

â–¼Worse than 85% of processors
3.9

Technical score

Technical score
3.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components

60%

2.8

Performance

18%

4.5

Cache & Architecture

10%

4.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated Graphics

â–¼Worse than 89% of processors
6.4

User score

User score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

User ratings

30%

3.1

Number of reviews

Based on 4 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
â–¼Worse than 99% of processors
  • intel-core-i3-6300t
intel-core-i3-6300t

Best prices

*As an Amazon Associate, we earn from qualifying purchases.

Best rankings

Available: ranking among products currently available (including other versions of this product).All: ranking among all products in the database.
Loading category ranking...

Technical Specifications of processor Intel Core i3 6300T

Technical score
Technical score
3.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An assessment of the processor's technical performance, covering key areas such as processing performance, core configuration, efficiency, platform support, integrated features, and thermal behavior.
When it matters
When you want to compare processors based on technical performance and available features.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
Score components:

60%

2.8

Performance

18%

4.5

Cache & Architecture

10%

4.9

Memory & PCIe

7%

7.6

Power & Thermal

4%

7.8

Platform

1%

6.9

Integrated Graphics

3.9
User score
User score
6.4/ 10
✕
What it is
A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 99% of models
Score components

70%

7.8

User ratings

30%

3.1

Number of reviews

Based on 4 buyer reviews from online shops.
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →
How we calculate this
User ratings – average star rating across all shop listings, weighted by how many reviews each has, on a 1–10 scale.
Number of reviews – how many buyer reviews the product has, on a logarithmic scale; the 8% most-reviewed models in the category get 10.
6.4
Popularity
Popularity
3.1/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator based on the number of reviews received by the processor.
When it matters
When you prefer to choose a processor reviewed and selected by many other buyers.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–² Better than 74% of models
Popularity:
Intel Core i3 6300T has a popularity score of 3.1 points, which is higher than that of 73.7% of products in this category.
3.1
Value for money
Value for money
5.9/ 10
✕
What it is
An indicator that combines the processor's overall rating with its cost.
When it matters
When you are looking for a processor with a good balance between performance, efficiency, and price.
Score distribution
â–¼
<55-66-77-88-99-10
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
Score components:

60%

4.1

Overall score

40%

10

Price

5.9
Brand name
Intel
Processor type
desktop
Processor type
desktop
â–² Better than 56% of models
This processor belongs to the desktop processor class, which is more advanced than that of 56% of processors and equal to that of 37.9% of processors.
CPU socket
LGA1151
CPU socket
LGA1151
â–² Better than 61% of models
This processor uses the LGA1151 CPU socket, which is newer than that of 60.7% of processors and equal to that of 9.4% of processors.
Chipset
?
CPU architecture
x86-64
CPU architecture
x86-64
â–² Better than 2% of models
This processor uses the x86-64 architecture, which is more advanced than that of 1.7% of processors and equal to that of 98.3% of processors.
Show more
N. of physical cores
2
N. of physical cores
2
â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
Market range: <2 – >12
This processor has 2 CPU cores, which is fewer than 79.3% of processors and equal to 20.6% of processors.
CPU threads
4
CPU threads
4
â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
Market range: <4 – >24
This processor offers 4 CPU threads, which is fewer than 67.4% of processors and equal to 26.5% of processors.
Threads per core
2
Threads per core
2
â–² Better than 30% of models
Market range: <0 – >2.5
This processor offers 2 threads per core, which is more than 30.3% of processors and equal to 69.7% of processors.
CPU boost clock speed
N/A
CPU base clock speed
2x 3.3 GHz
CPU base clock speed
2x 3.3 GHz
â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
This processor has a base clock of 2x3.3 GHz which is lower than that of 80.1% of processors and equal to that of 0.5% of processors.
Show more
Semiconductor size
14 nm
Semiconductor size
14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
This processor uses a 14 nm process node, which is older than that of 50.6% of processors and equal to that of 33.9% of processors.
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
Foundry
Intel 14 nm
â–¼ Worse than 55% of models
This processor is built on the Intel 14 nm foundry process, which is less advanced than that of 55.2% of processors and equal to that of 29.3% of processors.
L3 cache
4 MB
L3 cache
4 MB
â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
This processor has an L3 cache of 4 MB which is smaller than that of 70.2% of processors and equal to that of 14.6% of processors.
L2 cache
0.5 MB
L2 cache
0.5 MB
â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
This processor has an L2 cache of 0.5 MB which is smaller than that of 84.7% of processors and equal to that of 15.3% of processors.
L1 cache
128 KB
L1 cache
128 KB
â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
This processor has an L1 cache of 128 KB which is smaller than that of 83.2% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
Show more
DDR memory version
DDR3L/DDR4
DDR memory version
DDR3L/DDR4
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
This processor supports DDR DDR3L/DDR4, which is older than that of 77.7% of processors and equal to that of 5.4% of processors.
Maximum memory speed
2,133 MHz
Maximum memory speed
2,133 MHz
â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
This processor supports memory speeds up to 2,133 MHz, which is lower than that of 75.5% of processors and equal to 8.9% of processors.
Max memory speed (JEDEC)
?
Max memory speed (XMP / EXPO)
N/A
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
Maximum memory capacity
64 GB
â–¼ Worse than 44% of models
Market range: <32 GB – >256 GB
This processor supports up to 64 GB of memory, which is more than 28.4% of processors and equal to 27.5% of processors.
Show more
Integrated graphics
yes
Integrated graphics
yes
â–² Better than 12% of models
This processor includes integrated graphics. 12.4% of processors include integrated graphics.
Integrated GPU model
Intel HD Graphics 530
Integrated GPU model
Intel HD Graphics 530
â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
This processor uses the Intel HD Graphics 530 integrated GPU, which is less advanced than that in 78.4% of processors and equal to that in 2.3% of processors.
Integrated GPU execution units
24
Integrated GPU execution units
24
â–² Better than 49% of models
Market range: <6 – >64
This processor has 24 GPU execution units, which is more than 49.3% of processors and equal to 21.5% of processors.
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
Integrated GPU base frequency
350 MHz
â–² Better than 42% of models
Market range: <300 MHz – >800 MHz
This processor has an integrated GPU clock of 350 MHz which is higher than that of 42.3% of processors and equal to that of 26.1% of processors.
Integrated media encoders/decoders
H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decod
Show more
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
TDP (Thermal design power)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a TDP of 35 W which is lower than that of 51.9% of processors and equal to that of 14.8% of processors.
Base power (PL1)
35 W
Base power (PL1)
35 W
â–² Better than 52% of models
Market range: <15 W – >90 W
This processor has a base power of 35 W which is lower than that of 52% of processors and equal to that of 15% of processors.
Boost power (PL2)
?
Tau (power duration limit)
N/A
Configurable TDP
no
Configurable TDP
no
â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
This processor does not support configurable TDP. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
Show more

Intel Core i3 6300T vs the average processor

246810TotalPlatformPerformanceCache & ArchitectureMemory & PCIeIntegrated GraphicsPower & Thermal
  • Includes stock cooler
    Cooler included
    yes
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    This processor includes a stock cooler, the average processor does not. 25.9% of processors include a stock cooler.
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • 47.5% faster Blender rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    571.98
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (572 vs 387.66). The average processor needs 387.66 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    571.98 vs 387.66
  • 3.11x more popular
    Intel Core i3 6300T is more popular than the average processor (3.11 vs 1).
    3.11 vs 1
  • 7.14x cheaper
    Intel Core i3 6300T is cheaper than the average processor (£35 vs £250).
    £35 vs £250
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 3.11x more popular
    Intel Core i3 6300T is more popular than the average processor (3.11 vs 1).
    3.11 vs 1
  • 7.14x cheaper
    Intel Core i3 6300T is cheaper than the average processor (£35 vs £250).
    £35 vs £250
  • Advanced security extensions
    Security extensions
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP
    â–² Better than 81% of models
    This processor provides more advanced security extensions than the average processor (AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor).
    AES-NI, SHA, NX bit, Secure Key, SGX, MPX, OS Guard, Boot Guard, SMAP, SMEP vs AES-NI, NX bit, Secure Processor
  • Modern CPU socket
    CPU socket
    LGA1151
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    This processor uses a more modern CPU socket than the average processor (LGA1151 vs FP4).
    LGA1151 vs FP4
  • 47.5% faster Blender rendering
    Blender (bmw27) benchmark result
    571.98
    â–² Better than 64% of models
    Market range: <97 – >1.3k
    This processor has a lower Blender BMW27 render time than the average processor (572 vs 387.66). The average processor needs 387.66 for the Blender BMW27 test.
    571.98 vs 387.66
  • 16.7% more L3 per core
    L3 per core
    2 MB/core
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <1 MB/core – >3 MB/core
    This processor has more L3 cache per core than the average processor (2 MB/core vs 1.7 MB/core). The average processor provides 1.714 MB/core of L3 cache per core.
    2 MB/core vs 1.714 MB/core
  • 15.3% smaller die size
    Die size
    150 mm²
    â–² Better than 61% of models
    Market range: <99 mm² – >257 mm²
    This processor has a lower die size than the average processor (150 mm² vs 177 mm²). The average processor has a die size of 177 mm².
    150 mm² vs 177 mm²
  • Supports ECC memory
    ECC memory support
    yes
    â–² Better than 68% of models
    This processor supports ECC memory, the average processor does not. 32.5% of processors support ECC memory.
  • Includes stock cooler
    Cooler included
    yes
    â–² Better than 74% of models
    This processor includes a stock cooler, the average processor does not. 25.9% of processors include a stock cooler.
  • 22.2% lower base power
    Base power (PL1)
    35 W
    â–² Better than 52% of models
    Market range: <15 W – >90 W
    This processor has a lower base power draw than the average processor (35 W vs 45 W). The average processor has a base power draw of 45 W.
    35 W vs 45 W
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 76.8% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,118 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,118 vs 4,829
  • 62.3% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    3,985
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (3,985 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    3,985 vs 10,572.5
  • 59.9% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,118 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,118 vs 2,791
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.
  • 20.2% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    1996
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1996 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    1,996 vs 2,500
  • 24% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,118 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,118 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • 25.1% lower user score
    User score
    6.4/ 10
    ✕
    What it is
    A rating that combines user reviews and the total number of reviews received by the processor.
    When it matters
    When you want to know how a processor performs in real workloads and how reliable it is for gaming, productivity, and efficiency according to user feedback.
    Score distribution
    â–¼
    â–¼
    <55-66-77-88-99-10
    Intel Core i3 6300T
    the average processor
    Intel Core i3 6300T has a lower user score than the average processor (6.39 vs 8.000).
    6.39 vs 8
  • 11.3% worse value for money
    Intel Core i3 6300T has worse value for money than the average processor (5.89 vs 6.6).
    5.89 vs 6.56
  • 5 years older release date
    Release date
    2015
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <2k – >2k
    This processor has an older release date than the average processor (2015 vs 2020).
    September 2015
    2015 vs 2020
  • Narrower instruction support
    Instruction sets
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This processor supports a narrower instruction set than the average processor (MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA).
    MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, FMA3, AES vs MMX, SSE, SSE2, SSE3, SSSE3, SSE4A, SSE4.1, SSE4.2, AVX, AVX2, F16C, FMA3, AES, SHA
  • No crypto acceleration
    Cryptographic acceleration
    AES
    â–¼ Worse than 65% of models
    This processor does not include crypto acceleration, the average processor does. 0.00% of processors include crypto acceleration.
    AES vs AES, SHA
  • 4 fewer CPU cores
    N. of physical cores
    2
    â–¼ Worse than 79% of models
    Market range: <2 – >12
    This processor has fewer CPU cores than the average processor (2 vs 6). The average processor has 6 CPU cores.
    2 vs 6
  • 76.8% lower multi-core score
    Geekbench 6 multi-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 81% of models
    Market range: <763 – >14k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 multi-core score than the average processor (1,118 vs 4,829). The average processor scores 4,829 in Geekbench 6 multi-core.
    1,118 vs 4,829
  • 62.3% lower PassMark score
    PassMark benchmark result
    3,985
    â–¼ Worse than 77% of models
    Market range: <2.5k – >32.5k
    This processor has a lower PassMark benchmark score than the average processor (3,985 vs 10,572.5). The average processor scores 10,572.5 in PassMark benchmark.
    3,985 vs 10,572.5
  • 59.9% weaker multi-core performance
    Cinebench R20 multi-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    Market range: <702 – >10.8k
    This processor has a lower multi-core performance than the average processor (1,118 vs 2,791). The average processor scores 2,791 in Cinebench R20 multi-core.
    1,118 vs 2,791
  • 20.2% weaker single-core performance
    PassMark single-core benchmark score
    1996
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <1.4k – >4k
    This processor has a lower PassMark single-core score than the average processor (1996 vs 2,500). The average processor scores 2,500 in PassMark single-core.
    1,996 vs 2,500
  • 24% lower single-core score
    Geekbench 6 single-core benchmark score
    1,118
    â–¼ Worse than 69% of models
    Market range: <561 – >2.7k
    This processor has a lower Geekbench 6 single-core score than the average processor (1,118 vs 1,471). The average processor scores 1,471 in Geekbench 6 single-core.
    1,118 vs 1,471
  • 4 fewer CPU threads
    CPU threads
    4
    â–¼ Worse than 67% of models
    Market range: <4 – >24
    This processor has fewer CPU threads than the average processor (4 vs 8). The average processor has 8 CPU threads.
    4 vs 8
  • Lower base clock
    CPU base clock speed
    2 x 3.3 GHz
    â–¼ Worse than 80% of models
    This processor has a lower base clock than the average processor (2x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz).
    2x3.3 GHz vs 4x3.3 GHz
  • No Turbo Boost
    Turbo Boost version
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 89% of models
    This processor does not support Turbo Boost, the average processor does. 88.6% of processors support Turbo Boost.
  • 80% smaller L2 cache
    L2 cache
    0.5 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 85% of models
    Market range: <1 MB – >16 MB
    This processor has a lower L2 cache than the average processor (0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB). The average processor has L2 cache of 2.5 MB.
    0.5 MB vs 2.5 MB
  • 16.7% larger process node
    Semiconductor size
    14 nm
    â–¼ Worse than 51% of models
    Market range: <4 nm – >24 nm
    This processor has a higher process node than the average processor (14 nm vs 12 nm). The average processor uses a process node of 12 nm.
    14 nm vs 12 nm
  • 50% less L2 per core
    L2 per core
    0.25 MB/core
    â–¼ Worse than 63% of models
    Market range: <0.25 MB/core – >2 MB/core
    This processor has less L2 cache per core than the average processor (0.3 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core). The average processor provides 0.5 MB/core of L2 cache per core.
    0.25 MB/core vs 0.5 MB/core
  • 66.7% smaller L1 cache
    L1 cache
    128 KB
    â–¼ Worse than 83% of models
    Market range: <128 KB – >1.2k KB
    This processor has a lower L1 cache than the average processor (128 KB vs 384 KB). The average processor has L1 cache of 384 KB.
    128 KB vs 384 KB
  • 50% smaller L3 cache
    L3 cache
    4 MB
    â–¼ Worse than 70% of models
    Market range: <2 MB – >32 MB
    This processor has a lower L3 cache than the average processor (4 MB vs 8 MB). The average processor has L3 cache of 8 MB.
    4 MB vs 8 MB
  • 71.7% fewer transistors
    N. of transistors
    1.4 billion
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <1.303 billion – >25 billion
    This processor has fewer transistors than the average processor (1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion). The average processor has 4.95 billion transistors.
    1.4 billion vs 4.95 billion
  • Less advanced microarchitecture
    Microarchitecture codename
    Skylake
    â–¼ Worse than 62% of models
    This processor uses a less advanced microarchitecture than the average processor (Skylake vs Kaby Lake).
    Skylake vs Kaby Lake
  • 25.5% lower memory bandwidth
    Maximum memory bandwidth
    34.1 GB/s
    â–¼ Worse than 74% of models
    Market range: <25 GB/s – >100 GB/s
    This processor has a lower memory bandwidth than the average processor (34.1 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s). The average processor offers memory bandwidth of 45.8 GB/s.
    34.1 GB/s vs 45.8 GB/s
  • 27.3% lower memory speed
    Maximum memory speed
    2,133 MHz
    â–¼ Worse than 75% of models
    Market range: <1.5k MHz – >6.5k MHz
    This processor has a lower maximum memory speed than the average processor (2133 MHz vs 2933 MHz). The average processor supports memory speed of 2933 MHz.
    2,133 MHz vs 2,933 MHz
  • Older DDR support
    DDR memory version
    DDR3L/DDR4
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    This processor supports an older DDR generation than the average processor (DDR3L/DDR4 vs DDR4).
    DDR3L/DDR4 vs DDR4
  • Narrower media codec support
    Integrated media encoders/decoders
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decod
    Category Benchmark
    This processor supports fewer media codecs than the average processor (H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decod vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)).
    H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode), VP8 (HW decode/encode), VC-1 (HW decode), JPEG (HW decod vs H.264 (HW decode/encode), H.265 (HW decode/encode), VP9 (HW decode/encode), AV1 (HW decode)
  • Inferior integrated GPU
    Integrated GPU model
    Intel HD Graphics 530
    â–¼ Worse than 78% of models
    This processor uses an inferior integrated GPU to the average processor (Intel HD Graphics 530 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630).
    Intel HD Graphics 530 vs Intel UHD Graphics 630
  • No configurable TDP
    Configurable TDP
    no
    â–¼ Worse than 53% of models
    This processor does not support configurable TDP, the average processor does. 52.8% of processors support configurable TDP.

Video reviews

Hands-on testing, unboxing, and real-world video evaluations

Expert reviews

In-depth analysis and verdict from leading tech publications

V
valid.x86.fr
01/03/2026
Summary of the review
CPU-Z Benchmark for Intel Core i3-6300T (24T)
B
browser.geekbench.com
29/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-6300T Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
C
cpubenchmark.net
30/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel i3-6300 vs i3-6300T [cpubenchmark.net]
C
cpu.userbenchmark.com
30/03/2026
Summary of the review
UserBenchmark: Intel Core i5-6500 vs Intel Core i3-6300T
C
computerbase.de
20/01/2017
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-7350K Review: Overclocked to 5.1 GHz vs. i5
(Translated)Show original
B
browser.geekbench.com
30/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-6300T Benchmarks - Geekbench Browser
(Translated)Show original
C
cpubenchmark.net
29/03/2026
Summary of the review
Intel Core i3-6300T @ 3.30GHz - CPU Benchmarks
(Translated)Show original

Third-party reviews

Based on 4 buyer reviews from online shops.
Reviews last updated: May 2026 · How we calculate this
Read buyer reviews on Amazon →

What we like about Intel Core i3 6300T

  • High energy efficiency with a low TDP of 35W, making it ideal for quiet, low-power builds.
  • Runs very cool, significantly reducing cooling requirements and fan noise compared to standard 'i5' or non-'T' models.
  • Strong single-core performance for its generation, which benefits older games and basic office tasks.
  • Includes Hyper-Threading, providing 4 virtual threads to assist with light multitasking.
  • Reliable and durable for long-term use in compact systems like office PCs or home servers.
  • Supports DDR4 memory and features integrated HD Graphics 530, which is a step up from previous generations.

What we don't like about Intel Core i3 6300T

  • Strictly a dual-core processor, which causes significant bottlenecks in modern, multi-threaded applications and games.
  • Lower base clock frequency (3.3 GHz) compared to the standard i3-6300 (3.8 GHz) to maintain the low power envelope.
  • Lacks Turbo Boost technology, meaning it cannot automatically overclock for temporary performance bursts.
  • Struggles with modern gaming titles (2020+), often experiencing stutters, low frame rates, and high CPU usage.
  • Poor value for money on the used market compared to older 'i5' models which offer more physical cores for a similar price.
  • Requires an LGA 1151 socket motherboard, which may limit upgrade paths for users on older platforms.

Verdict

The Intel Core i3-6300T is a low-power, dual-core desktop processor from the 6th Generation Skylake architecture, featuring 4 threads via Hyper-Threading and a base clock speed of 3.3 GHz. Designed for energy efficiency, it operates with a remarkably low 35W TDP and includes 4MB of Intel Smart Cache while supporting up to 64GB of DDR4-2133 or DDR3L-1600 memory. Its main pros include excellent thermal efficiency for compact builds, integrated Intel HD Graphics 530 with 4K support, and compatibility with the LGA 1151 socket. However, its primary cons are the lack of Turbo Boost technology, which limits peak performance under heavy loads, and its age, which makes it less suitable for modern, resource-intensive gaming or professional video editing.

Compare Intel Core i3 6300T with other processors

1Product to compare no. 1
VS
2Product to compare no. 2
VS
3Product to compare no. 3 (optional)

Graphic comparison of Intel Core i3 6300T and other processors

No results found